ERA-Trotter Girouard Assoc. v. Superior Court

We hold that a judgment rendered in a superior court on a small claims appeal may not be attacked by a motion to vacate under Code of Civil Procedure section 473. We agree with Eloby v. Superior Court (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 972 [ 144 Cal.Rptr. 597 ] (Eloby), which held that a small claims appeal judgment may not be reconsidered on a motion for new trial or a motion to vacate under section 663. We disagree with Adamson v. Superior Court (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 505 [ 169 Cal.Rptr. 866 ] (Adamson), which held that such a judgment was subject to a motion for rehearing. In short, the legislative mandate that a judgment on a small claims appeal be “final and not appealable” (§ 116.780, subd. (a)) means the judgment is immune from virtually any postjudgment attack. In a proceeding designed to be a speedy resolution of disputes over relatively minor amounts of money, this immunity is the cost of finality.

Petitioners ERA-Trotter Girouard Assoc. (ERA) and Sentinel Realty Company (Sentinel) are plaintiffs in two small claims proceedings brought against real party Vivian B. Miller (Miller). ERA and Sentinel each obtained a judgment against Miller of $5,000. Miller appealed to the…