Wu v. Estate of Lau CA2/5

California Court of Appeal Jan 20, 2021 No. B299305Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the trial court failed to enter a signed, written judgment of dismissal as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 581d.

Issues

Whether an appeal can be maintained from a dismissal order that was not signed and filed by the trial court.
Whether an appeal from a post-judgment order is valid in the absence of a final judgment of dismissal.

Disposition. dismissed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“A minute order granting a motion to dismiss is “‘“ineffectual and nonappealable; no appeal can be taken except from the order signed and filed.”’””

“An appeal taken from a nonappealable order must be dismissed because an appellate court is without jurisdiction to entertain it.”

Filed 1/20/21 Wu v. Estate of Lau CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

NANCY WU, B299305

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. 19STCV00015)

ESTATE OF JOHN LAU et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William F. Fahey, Judge. Dismissed. Helen W. Quan for Plaintiff and Appellant. No appearance for Defendants and Respondents.

Plaintiff Nancy Wu (Wu) appeals from a trial court order declining to vacate a purported judgment dismissing her lawsuit without prejudice because she did not serve any of the named defendants within 70 days of filing the complaint. We cannot decide whether the order is an abuse of discretion because there has been no final judgment of dismissal signed by the trial court—and the court declined to enter such a judgment when asked to do so. So we shall dismiss the appeal, leaving Wu free to pursue whatever means seem most expedient to perfect an appeal, if that remains her chosen course of action.

I. BACKGROUND Wu, representing herself, filed a complaint against the Estate of John Lau and some 15 other defendants alleging primarily fraud-type causes of action. In brief, the complaint alleged Wu discovered during probate proceedings instituted in 2016 that her then-deceased ex-husband had fraudulently distributed community assets to others. Shortly after Wu’s complaint was filed, the trial court set a hearing for Wu to show cause why her lawsuit should not be dismissed because no proofs of service had been filed to indicate the complaint and summons had been served on any of the defendants. On the appointed date for the show cause hearing in March 2019, Wu did not show up. Nor had she submitted proof that any of the defendants had been served. The trial court dismissed Wu’s lawsuit without prejudice. Two months later, in May 2019, Wu moved under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b) (Section 473(b)) to

Wu v. Estate of Lau CA2/5

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

NANCY WU, B299305

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

BAKER, J.

KIM, J.

RUBIN, P. J.

AI Brief