![Nairne v. Marilyn Jessop-Humblet](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![Nairne v. Marilyn Jessop-Humblet](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
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.