Thursday, June 15, 2017

Ryan v. Rosenfeld, S232582


Appeal: Dismissal: Motion to vacate: Postjudgment orders:



Is the denial of a motion to vacate the judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 663 separately appealable?

Section 663 of the Code of Civil Procedure allows an aggrieved party in a civil case to move the trial court to vacate its final judgment. The question in this case is whether an order denying one of those motions is appealable even if it raises issues that could have been litigated via an appeal of the judgment. We answered yes to this question over a century ago. (See Bond v. United Railroads (1911) 159 Cal. 270, 273 (Bond).) Bond held that the statute authorizing appeals of postjudgment orders covered denials of section 663 motions.

The current version of that statute allows for the appeal of an order made after an appealable judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1, subd. (a)(2).)

Orders denying motions to vacate under section 663 fit that description, and this court has always interpreted the language currently found in section 904.1, subdivision (a)(2), to make appealable all section 663 denials. The Legislature has done nothing to undermine or overturn that interpretation despite enacting over a dozen other changes to this very statutory scheme. So the rule announced in Bond remains valid.

(Here Ryan later filed a notice of appeal for both the order dismissing the case and the order denying his motion to vacate the judgment).

(Rosenfeld has argued in this court that Ryan‘s motion to vacate was improper because the motion did not seek entry of a judgment different from the one that was entered. We do not address this question, which may bear on whether Ryan filed a proper section 663 motion. The Court of Appeal may address the question on remand – fn. 1).



Secondary sources: Witkin, Cal. Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Appeal, § 200, p. 277; Eisenberg et al., Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Appeals and Writs (2014), p. 2-123.



(Cal.S.C. June 15, 2017, Ryan v. Rosenfeld, S232582).



Un jugement civil est entré en force, puis la partie perdante demande son annulation, par exemple par le biais d'une "motion to vacate" (Section 663 du Code californien de procédure civile). Si le Juge rejette dite motion, un appel peut-il être déposé (au sens de la Section 904.1, subd. (a)(2) du Code) ? La réponse est affirmative, même si les arguments à l'appui de l'appel auraient pu être plaidés dans le cadre d'un appel contre le premier jugement, entré en force. Plus généralement, tous les rejets de requêtes selon la Section 663 peuvent faire l'objet d'un appel.

Tel en a décidé la Cour Suprême de Californie dans une décision de 1911 déjà, confirmée ici, et qui n'a pas été modifiée à ce jour. Le législateur n'est pour sa part pas intervenu à cet égard.

No comments:

Post a Comment