Filing a Reconsideration Motion Before Appealing? Better Reconsider.
Motions for reconsideration are common after adverse rulings, such as rulings granting Anti-SLAPP motions. And reconsideration motions extend the time to file an appeal. But the Third Appellate District recently held that an Anti-SLAPP order that disposes of the entire case is akin to entry of a final judgment. As the court puts it:
"[T]he May 11 order granting his anti-SLAPP motion and striking the complaint was an appealable judgment, and [] upon its entry and service by the clerk, the trial court lost jurisdiction to entertain or decide a motion for reconsideration."
Why is this significant? Because a motion for reconsideration is not valid after entry of judgment. Thus, there can be no valid reconsideration motion of such an order.
And no valid motion, no extension of time to appeal under CRC 8.108, which plaintiff had relied upon. Result: Plaintiff's appeal dismissed.
This is yet another way you can injure your appellate rights via reconsideration motions. Be wary.
Also: The California Supreme Court decision in Alan v. American Honda strikes again. Alan is an important case used to determine when the time to appeal begins running under Rules of Court rule 8.104. The Third District relies on it here for the proposition that an otherwise nonappealable order -- a statement of decision in Alan; a minute order here -- may be appealable, in the court's discretion. But the oft overlooked conclusion of Alan is that the Supreme Court found it was error to find the statement of decision appealable. Not an abuse of discretion, but legal error.
The high Court in Alan did not explain this conclusion, but presumably it had to do with the liberal policy of “according [the] right [to appeal] in doubtful cases," rather than dismissing appeals on technical grounds.
Yet the Third District, like many of districts, feels it is compelled to treat the minute order before it -- though such orders typically are not appealable -- as appealable. With the result that the appeal is dismissed... on technical grounds.
What the courts say is often different from what they do. Again, be wary.
Marshall v. Webster (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2020) C088240. https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2020/c088240.html