Focus (Forum & Focus)
May 2, 2007
Strict Compliance
Focus Column - By Margaret Grignon and Zareh Jaltorossian - The California Supreme Court has come down squarely on the side of “form” and rejected any notion of mere substantial compliance with the timing rules for filing notices of appeal.
By Margaret Grignon and Zareh Jaltorossian
In August 2005, the 2nd District Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal as untimely because it had been filed more than 60 days after the Superior Court clerk mailed the parties documents constituting "notice of entry" of the court's order. That "notice" triggered the 60-day time period for filing a notice of appeal set forth in Rule 8.104(a).
&nb...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In