Judge: H. Jay Ford, III, Case: BC452100, Date: 2023-08-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC452100    Hearing Date: August 31, 2023    Dept: O

  Case Name:  Morgan v. Wang, et al.

SUBJECT:                 MOTION TO VACATE NOVEMBER 1, 2012 SUMMARY JUDGMENT PER CCP §657(1)(3)(4)

MOVING PARTY:   Plaintiff Leeann Morgan (self-represented)

RESP. PARTY:         Defendants Jeffrey Wang, MD; Rahoul Basho, MD; Joshua Bales, MD; and The Regents of the University of California

TENTATIVE RULING

  Plaintiff Leeann Morgan’s Motion to Vacate November 1, 2012 Summary Judgment Per CCP §657(1),(3) and (4) is DENIED. 

Pursuant to CCP §657, Plaintiff moves to vacate the Court’s 11-1-12 order granting summary judgment and demands that a jury trial be held on her claims.  CCP §657 allows for the Court to vacate a verdict or “any other decision” and to grant a new or further trial.  CCP §657 is subject to the 75-day jurisdictional deadline set forth in CCP §660(c). 

“Except as otherwise provided in Section 12a of this code, the power of the court to rule on a motion for a new trial shall expire 75 days after the mailing of notice of entry of judgment by the clerk of the court pursuant to Section 664.5 or 75 days after service on the moving party by any party of written notice of entry of judgment, whichever is earlier, or if that notice has not been given, 75 days after the filing of the first notice of intention to move for a new trial. If the motion is not determined within the 75-day period, or within that period as extended, the effect shall be a denial of the motion without further order of the court.”  CCP §660(c).

There is, in effect, a 75–day limit on the trial court's power to grant a new trial. During the 75 days, the court can either grant or deny a new trial motion; but thereafter, the motion is denied by operation of law.  See CCP § 660(c)(60-day deadline extended to 75-days per amendment effective on 1-1-9); Dodge v. Sup.Ct. (Casper's Concrete Cutting, Inc.) (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 513, 517–518.  This time period is jurisdictional.  See Westrec Marina Mgt., Inc. v. Jardine Ins. Brokers Orange County, Inc. (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 1042, 1049 (order entered on 61st day after entry of judgment reversed for lack of jurisdiction)(applying prior version of statute imposing 60-day deadline).

            The Court entered summary judgment on 11-1-12.  Defendants served a notice of entry of judgment on Plaintiff on 11-8-12.  See Opposition, Dec. of M. Levinson, ¶3, Ex. A.  Plaintiff does not dispute that notice of entry of judgment was serve on her on 11-8-12.  The Court therefore had until 1-22-13 to consider this motion.  After that date, the Court lost jurisdiction to grant the motion and the motion is denied by operation of law.  This motion is being heard a decade after the jurisdictional deadline expired.