Randall

Randall v. Mousseau

Good Law
2 Cal. App. 5th 929·2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 715·206 Cal. Rptr. 3d 526
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 2016B263945California2,296 words

Opinion

Opinion

Zelon, J.

—Litigants in California may exercise their right to appeal without obtaining and transmitting to the Court of Appeal a verbatim transcript of the oral proceedings in the trial court. One alternative mechanism available to litigants is the settled statement, which requires the parties and the court to create an adequate, accurate record of the trial or ruling on appeal. When a proper motion is made, it is the obligation of the parties and the court to work together to prepare the settled statement. California law has long recognized this obligation: a trial court may not “deprive a litigant of his right of appeal by simply refusing to perform a plain duty.” (Sansome v. Myers (1889) 80 Cal. 483, 486 [ 22 P. 212 ].)

Appellant Wendy Randall appeals a judgment for defendant after a court trial. There was no court reporter during the trial, and the trial court denied Randall’s motion for a settled statement after trial. The trial court abused its discretion by denying Randall’s motion, and as a result, depriving her of her right to her appeal, but Randall failed to seek timely review of that denial. Because the issue has been forfeited, and because the record before us is…

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.