Nairne v. Marilyn Jessop-Humblet Nairne v. Marilyn Jessop-Humblet

Nairne v. Marilyn Jessop-Humblet

101 CAL.APP.4TH 1124, 124 CAL.RPTR.2D 726, 2002.CA.7437 , 2 CAL. DAILY OP. SERV. 8284, 2002 DAILY JOURNAL D.A.R. 10,345

    • € 0,99
    • € 0,99

Publisher Description

Absent consent of the parties, does a trial court have authority to shorten the minimum notice period for the hearing of a summary judgment motion? We answer this question in the negative and therefore issue a writ of mandate directing the trial court to vacate an order authorizing parties who move for summary judgment in this action to notice the hearing only 21 days in advance.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
2002
14 August
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
11
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
67.7
KB

More Books by California Court of Appeals

People v. Crayton People v. Crayton
1999
Saelzler v. Advanced Group 400 Saelzler v. Advanced Group 400
1999
Ali v. City of Los Angeles Ali v. City of Los Angeles
1999
County of Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles County of Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles
1999
County of Orange v. Carl D. County of Orange v. Carl D.
1999
Boehm & Associates v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Boehm & Associates v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
1999