Woo

Woo v. Superior Court

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 864·75 Cal. App. 4th 169·89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 20·99 Daily Journal DAR 10077·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7954
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 23, 1999D032536California3,931 words

Opinion

Opinion

McDonald, J.

Defendant Victor L. Woo filed this petition for writ of mandate challenging the trial court’s denial of his motion for summary judgment in a medical malpractice action filed by plaintiff and real party in interest Soheilia Zarabi. Zarabi filed a response to the petition; we issued an order to show cause and heard oral argument from the parties.

This writ proceeding raises two issues: The timeliness of Woo’s petition for writ of mandate; and whether Zarabi’s amended complaint naming Woo as a defendant relates back to the date of filing her original complaint.

I

Timeliness of Petition for Writ of Mandate

On August 28, 1998, Woo filed a motion for summary judgment. On October 16, the trial court issued a telephonic ruling granting the motion. On October 30, the trial court heard oral argument on the motion and on November 12 issued a written ruling denying the motion. A degree of uncertainty pervades the procedure that followed. Woo asserts the court clerk served the November 12 written ruling by mail on November 23; Zarabi asserts the court clerk served the November 12 written ruling by mail on November 12. Each party has submitted a proof of service form that supports…

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.