California Court of Appeal

In a dispute regarding development and construction of a condominium project, the trial court improperly granted defendants' renewed motion for relief under Code of Civil Procedure 473(b) from the default judgment, where: 1) the trial court correctly concluded that defendants did not satisfactorily explain their failure to present earlier the evidence proffered in their attorney's second affidavit of fault; but 2) the trial court erred in concluding that section 1008's requirements do not apply to a renewed motion for mandatory relief from default based upon an affidavit of attorney fault because, under section 1008's clear and unambiguous language, it applies to all renewal motions; and thus, 3) the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the renewed motion.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/10/2013
• Published 04/10/2013

Judges

• WILLHITE

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel