Farkhondehpour

Opinion of the Court by Cantil-Sakauye, C. J.

We granted review to address apparent conflicts in the Courts of Appeal concerning (1) whether a party in default has standing to file a motion for a “new trial” asserting legal error relating to calculation of damages and (2) whether a trial court may award treble damages and attorney’s fees under Penal Code section 496, subdivision (c)1 in a case involving, not trafficking of stolen goods, but instead, fraudulent diversion of a partnership’s cash distributions. The Court of Appeal below answered “yes,” and “no,” respectively. We answer yes to both questions — and hence affirm the appellate court’s judgment in the first respect, and reverse it in the second. As we will explain, the standing conclusion is supported by the statutory scheme as construed by well- reasoned prior appellate decisions and considerations of judicial economy. Likewise, the second conclusion — that treble damages and attorney’s fees are available under section 496(c) when, as here, property “has been obtained in any manner constituting theft” — is compelled by the statute’s unambiguous words and our obligation to honor them. If, as the Court of Appeal below…