June 2019

In Longview International, Inc. v. Stirling, the Sixth Appellate District denied a judgment debtor’s motion to expunge a judgment lien once she discovered that the judgment creditor was suspended at the time the abstract of judgment was recorded.  Thereafter, the corporation was revived, e.g., had its corporate powers reinstated.  The Court held that the abstract of judgment was a procedural act that was retroactively validated once the suspended corporation’s powers were reinstated.

In Colombo v. Kinkle, Rodiger & Spriggs, the Fourth Appellate District held that res judicata barred Colombo, a vexatious litigant subject to a prefiling order under Code of Civil Procedure section 391.7 from filing successive prefiling requests institute new litigation, making it clear that he had one bite at the apple.

In In re Marriage of Wallace Loy Tim and Amy Ju Wong, the Fourth Appellate District reiterated that a postjudgment order is only appealable if it passdx three additional tests: (1) the issue is different from the issues decided in the judgment; (2) the order affects the judgment or relates to its enforcement; and (3) the order is not “preliminary to a later judgment.”  Here, the respondent appealed orders pertaining to discovery referee reports and recommendations regarding discovery and related issues. The court noted that the appeal of postjudgment discovery orders is difficult, collecting cases that considered that issue, but denied the appeal of the orders at issue because it found that those discovery orders would be appealable from the determination of the request for order.

In Correia v. NB Baker Electric, Inc., the Fourth Appellate District held that courts do not have the authority to order a Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) representative action into arbitration, and a provision in a predispute arbitration agreement that requires that is unenforceable because the state is the real party in interest in a PAGA claim, and must have consented to that agreement to waive its rights.