Obiekea

DISCUSSION

Appeal is taken from the judgment entered in favor of defendant Young Chul Kim. (Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1, subd. (a)(1).) Plaintiff served his notice of appeal and briefs on AFS, and AFS responded. However, AFS is not a party to this appeal: after the trial court struck the complaint against AFS in March 2012, plaintiff did not pursue a timely appeal. (See Wilson v. Sharp (1954) 42 Cal.2d 675, 677 [an order striking the complaint against a defendant is an appealable final judgment as to that defendant]. Accord: Adohr Milk Farms, Inc. v. Love (1967) 255 Cal.App.2d 366, 370.) We have no jurisdiction to review or overturn the judgment in favor of AFS. The only proper respondent in this appeal is defendant Kim, who has not appeared in this lawsuit. Further confusing matters, plaintiff’s opening brief poses the question of whether his complaint can “survive a demurrer.” There is no demurrer at issue here, at least not one that we can see. There is no document entitled “demurrer” in the record, nor is there an opposition to a demurrer, nor is there a ruling on a demurrer. The judgment that is the subject of this appeal does not arise from a demurrer: the trial court’s minute…