Earlier you reported that in May 2009 the small claims court ruled against you. Obviously if what you say is correct, the judge denied you due process of law.
However, whether or not you filed a timely notice of appeal (30-days) the small claims judge’s refusal to allow cross-examination is moot.
The reasons being that:
(1) If you didn’t file a timely from the small claims judgement, it cannot be directly or collaterally attacked now - regardless of what errors may have beencommitted by the judge. The judgment would be considered res adjudicata (the thing is settled for all time.)
(2) Even if you had appealed to the next level, the Superior Court would have ignored any such errors and granted a new hearing on the merits of the claim.
In other words - unlike an appeal from a trial court of general jurisdiction where the appellate court reviews what occurred at the trial – an appeal from small claims results in a trial or hearing de novo (literally afresh/anew).
Interesting is that the Superior Court’s judgment on the hearing cannot be appealed. It is final. (California Code of Civil Procedure Section 116.780)
