One more question

[Mellie2019]

What is the name of your state? CA

With the understanding that I may not win my reversal of the granting of the motion to vacate, would it be better to forego the asking of the bench officer to change his ruling and go straight to the appeals court?

In my opinion, based on the undertakings at the proceedings, I feel the bench officer was pro-defendant.

Example: When the evidence was given to support the defendant did indeed receive a copy of the service, the defendant stated, "She did bring me some mail." Which the bench officer then replied, "Don't make any comments until I read this and ask you."

According to statute, the summons was served on a person apparently in cahrge of usual mailing address. Or do you think I am reaching? I guess that's two questions. LOL

 

[dcatz]

Go straight with what?

As I explained, the ruling in the case (the judgment) is conclusive on the plaintiff. As I understand it, you want to appeal the ruling granting the motion to vacate that then led to a hearing of the case and the judgment. That matter is within the discretion of the bench officer and, even if it weren’t, the unfortunate truth is that there is commonly almost no record of what transpired (no court reporter and nothing introduced into evidence retained), so the decision necessarily defaults back to the bench officer. It has to go to the bench officer for reconsideration.

(I’m almost reluctant to explain further, because I think it will just stir the waters but) while there is a split of authority on whether a Superior Court judgment that is on appeal from the Small Claims division is final and not appealable, so far the Court has left open the question of reconsideration in the unusual case that there could be fraud on the Court (or void acts in excess of jurisdiction). That case citation is ERA-Trotter Girouard Assoc. v Superior Court 50 CA4th at 1857.

But I have to warn you that you’re treading in deep water here, and nothing in your posts suggests that you could prove fraud on the Court. (In this context, lying does not equal fraud.) You’d also need a lawyer to go further, and I doubt that the amount in contention would justify one. Pick your battles wisely and live to fight another day. It’s not so much a matter of reaching as continuing to be frustrated. You’re trying to “reinstate” a default judgment, and that fact that the case was later lost on the merits is always going to be the 900 lb. gorilla in the room.

 

[JETX]

One more question

Don't start a new thread to continue an existing one. Put your 'one more question' in the original thread.