April motion in California

2016The boys were now “strapping teenagers.” (Singer, supra, 7 Cal.App.3d at p. 810 .) The trial court restricted the evidence at the October healing to change of circumstances since the April hearing.

2016The boys were now “strapping teenagers.” (Singer, supra, 7 Cal.App.3d at p. 810 .) The trial court restricted the evidence at the October healing to change of circumstances since the April hearing.

2022(Manela v. Superior Court, supra, 177 Cal.App.4th at p. 1149 .) Burnet and Veatch could reasonably conclude his April motion lacked merit; it was ultimately denied.

2003The probation officer's failure to do so deprives the court of further jurisdiction, whether or not the letter includes a waiver of the right to be present and represented by counsel. ( Hoddinott, supra, 12 Cal.4th at p. 1000 , 50 Cal. Rptr.2d 706 , 911 P.2d 1381 ; § 1203.2a) The record before us is silent as to whether the April motion or October demand was ever delivered to Broughton's probation officer.

2003(Hoddinott, supra, 12 Cal.4th at p. 1000 ; § 1203.2a) The record before us is silent as to whether the April motion or October demand was ever delivered to Broughton’s probation officer.

1990First, April's claim for loss of parental consortium cannot stand in light of Borer v. American Airlines, Inc. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 441 [ 138 Cal.Rptr. 302 , 563 P.2d 858 ].

1990First, April's claim for loss of parental consortium cannot stand in light of Borer v. American Airlines, Inc. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 441 [ 138 Cal.Rptr. 302 , 563 P.2d 858 ].

1984(Hollister Convalescent Hosp., Inc. v. Rico (1975) 15 Cal.3d 660 [ 125 Cal.Rptr. 757 , 542 P.2d 1349 ].) The April motion to vacate the March 30 judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction was filed well within the 60-day period, but the order of denial was entered in the minutes on April 22, 1981, thus providing an extension under rule 3(b) only for 30 days thereafter, until May 22, 1981, which is still within the 60-day period from March 31 and yet before the June 17 filing of the section 473 motion to vacate.

1984(Hollister Convalescent Hosp., Inc. v. Rico (1975) 15 Cal.3d 660 [ 125 Cal.Rptr. 757 , 542 P.2d 1349 ].) The April motion to vacate the March 30 judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction was filed well within the 60-day period, but the order of denial was entered in the minutes on April 22, 1981, thus providing an extension under rule 3(b) only for 30 days thereafter, until May 22, 1981, which is still within the 60-day period from March 31 and yet before the June 17 filing of the section 473 motion to vacate.

1971Unaccountably on April 5, 16 days before that hearing, 4-count information charging the burglaries to which defendant had pleaded guilty in 1966 was filed in the superior court. 4 Early in April defendant, in the municipal court, moved for a dismissal of the case, relying chiefly on People v. Guaracha, 272 Cal.App.2d 839 [ 77 Cal.Rptr. 695 ].

1971Unaccountably on April 5, 16 days before that hearing, 4-count information charging the burglaries to which defendant had pleaded guilty in 1966 was filed in the superior court. 4 Early in April defendant, in the municipal court, moved for a dismissal of the case, relying chiefly on People v. Guaracha, 272 Cal.App.2d 839 [ 77 Cal.Rptr. 695 ].

1960In support of its position that a consideration of the alleged errors by the trial court is foreclosed by the action of this court in denying defendant’s petition for alternative writs of prohibition and mandate, respondent cites People v. Lancellotti, 147 Cal.App.2d 723 [ 305 P.2d 926 ], The cited ease is not authority for the contention advanced.

1960In support of its position that a consideration of the alleged errors by the trial court is foreclosed by the action of this court in denying defendant’s petition for alternative writs of prohibition and mandate, respondent cites People v. Lancellotti, 147 Cal.App.2d 723 [ 305 P.2d 926 ], The cited ease is not authority for the contention advanced.