Shpiller

Shpiller v. Harry C's Redlands

Caution
13 Cal. App. 4th 1177·16 Cal. Rptr. 2d 814·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 188·93 Daily Journal DAR 2617·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1420
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 26, 1993E008544California807 words

Opinion

Opinion

Timlin, J.

I.

Introduction

Bruce Shpiller (cross-complainant) purports to appeal from an order and “notice of ruling” announcing the dismissal, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 583.410 and 583.420, of both his cross-complaint against Harry C’s of Redlands (cross-defendant) and cross-defendant’s complaint against him. A “notice of ruling” is not an appealable judgment or order and the record on appeal contains no order of dismissal. (See §904.1.)

For many years, this court, and most, if not all appellate courts, have repeatedly admonished appellants about the failure to make the preliminary and fundamental determination that what they are appealing from is, in fact, an appealable order or judgment. (This, of course, assumes the existence of an order or judgment.) Such admonishments being of little avail, California Rules of Court, rule 13 was amended, effective July 1, 1989, to require that every opening brief contain “either a statement that the appeal is from a judgment that finally disposes of all issues between the parties or a statement explaining why the order or nonfinal judgment is appealable.”

It is our experience that, despite the amendment of rule 13 of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.