Blauser v. Dubin

Filed 11/19/24

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

BETTIE BLAUSER,

Plaintiff and Appellant, G063715

v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2021-01207635)

ERIC J. DUBIN et al., OPINION

Defendants and Respondents.

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Andre De La Cruz, Judge. Dismissed. Law Offices of Janice M. Vinci and Janice Marie Vinci for Plaintiff and Appellant. Dubin Law Firm, Eric J. Dubin; Law Office of J. Cha & Associates and Jessica Byulnim Cha for Defendants and Respondents. * * *

THE COURT:* Appellant Bettie Blauser’s notice of appeal references a purported judgment of dismissal. The purported judgment is a three-page unsigned minute order detailing the final day of a jury trial. Two consecutive entries near the end of the minute order state: “The Court GRANTS the motion for non-suit as set forth on the record and non-suit is entered as to the First Amended Complaint. [¶] Pursuant to the oral request by Cross-Complainant, the Court orders the First Amended Cross-Complaint dismissed without prejudice.” On August 5, 2024, this court invited the parties to brief appealability. The briefing order raised the concern that the trial court’s order was not appealable. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 904.1, subd. (a).)1 We also invited appellant to obtain a judgment of dismissal from the trial court so that this appeal might proceed as one prematurely taken from the judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.104(d)(2).) Three months later, appellant filed in this court a “notice of entry of judgment or order.” The “new” order attached to the notice of entry is the same December 13, 2023 minute order that was the basis of the notice of appeal. However, in an apparent attempt to address appealability concerns raised by this court, the trial court added its signature and the phrase “it is so ordered” to the end of the minute order.2