MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (CCP S 1008)
1. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME LOZANO VS LEDESMA & MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION CVPS2202260 MEYER CONSTRUCTION (CCP S 1008) CO., INC. Tentative Ruling:
The Court denies this motion for reconsideration. The matter is off calendar.
The Court reiterates its order on April 17, 2026:
Court has read and considered court filings. The Court having read and considered the pleadings of both parties, having read and considered the Court of Appeal's Remittitur filed January 20, 2026, denies the instant "Motion to Reactivate Case on Complaint" Hearing re: Motion (to Reactivate Case) on 04/24/2026 at 08:30 AM vacated. The Court of Appeal stated in its November 17, 2025 Order: "The court has reviewed the civil case information statement filed November 10, 2025, the notice of appeal filed October 16, 2025, the judgment entered July 17, 2023, from which appellant attempts to appeal, and the notice of entry of judgment dated August 4, 2023.
Because the appeal appears to be untimely, it must be and is DISMISSED. California Rules of Court, rule 8. 104(a) provides that a notice of appeal must be filed within 60 days following service of the notice of entry of judgment or 180 days after entry of judgment, whichever is earlier. In this case, the notice of appeal was filed 804 days following service of the notice of entry and 822 days after entry of judgment. The timeliness requirement is absolutely jurisdictional. There are no exceptions other than those provided in California Rules of Court, rule 8. 108. (K.J. v.
Los Angeles Unified School Dist. (2020) 8 Cal.5th 875, 881; Garg v. Garg(2022) 82 Ca1.App. 5th 1036, 1041.) Thus, the court has no jurisdiction over this appeal." In plain language, this case has ended.
2. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME MOTION FOR SUMMARY CVRI2501278 NIZAM VS TAPIA ADJUDICATION ON COMPLAINT Tentative Ruling:
Summary of Ruling: The Court declines to rule on all evidentiary objections. The request for summary adjudication is improper and is denied as it fails to comply with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1350(b) and (d) and CCP § 437c
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”