Riverside Superior Court violates civil procedure with statement of decisions. Ignores directions from the Court of Appeal.

Any litigant can request a statement of decision at a trial. The purpose is to  define the judicial officer’s decision in wrting and allow litigants the opportunity to identify ambiguities and fallacies in the ruling through objections. If those objections are not raised the issues cannot be raised in the corresponding appeal.

However, the court fails to adhere to California rules of court. As an example the court issued a tentative statement of decision on 9/10/2013.  The appropriate objections were filed in a timely manner. The court amended its tentative statement of decision on 10/2/2013 and incorporated the amendment by reference in the minute order.  Again the appropriate objections were filed to the modified tentative statement of decision.

To date the court has not addressed a single decision and leaves a tentative decision that is not binding languishing in the case, prohibiting that a party file an appeal.

courtrulingtentaive

Now one would assume that judges are simply not famiilar with rules of court or the procedures that govern a request for statement of decision BUT a similar issue was already addressed by the  appeal court  in a peremptory writ in 2011 by the Court of Appeal, which DIRECTED  the court to adhere to procedure.

  http://halrosner.com/files/5/0/6/2/4/252130-242605/11_0322_Writ_Decision_of_Court_(2).pdf

It is apparent that the Riverside Superior Court prefers to ignore the directions of its supervisory Court of Appeal.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s