Pacific Pioneer Ins. Co. v. Super. Ct.

Filed 01/30/20

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

PACIFIC PIONEER INSURANCE COMPANY,

Petitioner, G057326 v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2018-00987364) THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY, OPINION

Respondent;

VANESSA GONZALEZ,

Real Party in Interest.

Original proceedings; petition for a writ of mandate to challenge an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Carmen Luege, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Petition granted. Dwayne S. Beck and James W. Colfer for Petitioner. Buchalter and Harry W.R. Chamberlain II for Association of Southern California Defense Counsel as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Shaun Bauman and Thanos Simoudis for Real Party in Interest.

In this case of first impression, we determine that insurers have the right to appeal a small claims default judgment entered against their insureds. We conclude the insured’s failure to appear in small claims court does not annul the appeal right conferred upon the insurer by Code of Civil Procedure section 116.710, subdivision (c).1 The background of the case is prosaic: Vanessa Gonzalez sued Jonathan Johnson in small claims court after an auto accident in Orange. Johnson did not show up for the small claims hearing, and the small claims court entered a default judgment against him for $10,000, plus $140 in costs. Johnson’s auto insurer is Pacific Pioneer Insurance Company. Pacific Pioneer filed a timely notice of appeal. The trial court struck the notice of appeal, and Pacific Pioneer sought to set aside that order. This prompted the trial court to compose a minute order explaining why it had struck the notice. The court reasoned subdivision (d) of section 116.710 precludes a non-appearing “defendant” – which the court equated with Pacific Pioneer – from appealing a small claims judgment. Pacific Pioneer then filed this writ petition, challenging the trial court’s reading of the relevant statutes. This court set an order to show cause to consider the merits of the petition. We now issue the requested writ and direct the trial court to reinstate Pacific Pioneer’s notice of appeal. We conclude all three levels of analysis outlined in Halbert’s Lumber, Inc. v. Lucky Stores, Inc. (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1233, 1238 – (1) statutory text, (2) legislative intent, and (3) policy – militate in favor of an insurer’s right to appeal from a small claims judgment brought on by its insured’s default. First, we examine the text of the statutory scheme: Section 116.710 governs the appeal of small claims actions. We quote the entirety of the statute in the