What is a Condensed Narrative/Settled Statement on Appeal?

Useful Rulings on Condensed Narrative/Settled Statement on Appeal

Rulings on Condensed Narrative/Settled Statement on Appeal

1-25 of 250 results

GUNTER ZIELKE ET AL VS ERIC SCOTT ROSENSTIEL ET AL

Contents of Proposed Settled Statement California Rules of Court, Rule 8.137(d) provides that the proposed statement must (1) contain a statement of the points the appellant is raising on appeal; (2) contain a condensed narrative of the oral proceedings specified by the appellant; and (3) have attached to it a copy of the judgment or order being appealed. On July 15, 2020 Defendants/Appellants filed an amended proposed statement on appeal.

  • Hearing

    Aug 28, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

GUNTER ZIELKE ET AL VS ERIC SCOTT ROSENSTIEL ET AL

However, Defendants/Appellants have not provided a condensed narrative of the oral proceedings specified by the appellant. (See Appellants’ Proposed Settled Statement, ¶ 6, Attachment 6.) Defendants/Appellants’ Summary of Motions is argumentative and primarily restates the arguments of Defendants/Appellants’ motions. The proposed settled statement must therefore be corrected to be in compliance with Rule 8.137(d) and provide a condensed narrative of the oral proceedings.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

MANCHESTER PROPERTIES,INC VS HAMIDREZA MALEKZADEH KASHANI

If the Court grants the motion, then the following procedures are used: 1) the appellant must serve and file a condensed narrative of the oral proceedings that the appellant believes necessary for the appeal within 30 days of the order granting the motion to use the settled statement; 2) the respondent may then serve and file proposed amendments to the appellant's narrative within 20 days after the appellant serves the condensed narrative; 3) the clerk then sets a date for a settlement hearing no later than

  • Hearing

    Nov 04, 2016

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LILLIAN CARTER ET AL VS UNIVERSAL STUDIOS INC ET AL

On January 24, 2017, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to use a settled statement with respect to the April 19, 2016 hearing, and ordered the parties to meet and confer in a good faith attempt to reach agreement on the content of the settled statement. (See January 24, 2017 Minute Order.) The parties have now informed the Court that they have stipulated to the content of the settled statement.

  • Hearing

    Mar 09, 2017

  • Judge

    Brian S. Currey or John A. Slawson

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

EMILIA WANG VS LAMA NORBU

The Court finds that Defendant’s filing of the proposed settled statement in conjunction with the motion is not in violation of Rule 8.137(b)(1) or grounds for denying the motion, and the Court deems the proposed settled statement as filed and served as of this date. Pursuant to Rule 8.137(b)(4), “[w]ithin 20 days after the appellant serves the condensed narrative, the respondent may serve and file proposed amendments.”

  • Hearing

    Dec 07, 2016

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

EMILIA WANG VS LAMA NORBU

The Court finds that Defendant’s filing of the proposed settled statement in conjunction with the motion is not in violation of Rule 8.137(b)(1) or grounds for denying the motion, and the Court deems the proposed settled statement as filed and served as of this date. Pursuant to Rule 8.137(b)(4), “[w]ithin 20 days after the appellant serves the condensed narrative, the respondent may serve and file proposed amendments.”

  • Hearing

    Dec 06, 2016

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

BALBOA CAPITAL CORPORATION VS. ERIC LADENHEIM MD, INC.

Defendants’ and Cross-Complainant’s Motion to Use a Settled Statement as Part of the Record on Appeal is moot and off calendar by virtue of the court’s signing and filing of the Stipulated Condensed Narrative Statement for Settled Statement on Appeal.

  • Hearing

    Oct 26, 2017

MICHAEL M. NESTER VS SUZANNE E. WINDUS

MOTION FOR SETTLED STATEMENT [CRC Rule 8.137.] Date: 11/15/19 Case: Michael M. Nester v. Suzanne E. Windus (EC 068118) TENTATIVE RULING: With respect to plaintiff/appellant Michael Nester’s Motion for Settled Statement As to Proceedings on May 28, 2019, the Court finds that the proposed statement does not contain material required under CRC Rule 8.137(d). Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 8.137 (f)(3)(A), the Court orders plaintiff/appellant Michael M. Nester to prepare a new proposed statement.

  • Hearing

    Nov 15, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

DR. DAVOUD GHAREHBAGHI, ET AL., VS ALIREZA MAHDAVI, ET AL.,

Defendant should submit a proposed settled statement in conformity with the current version of CRC 8.137(d) within 30 days after service of notice of the order granting the request to use settled statement. Respondent will have 20 days after service of the proposed statement to serve proposed amendments. The Court will adhere to the procedure set forth in the current version of the CRC Rule 8.137.

  • Hearing

    Jan 31, 2018

MAHVASH MAZAGANI VS HOUMAN MOGHADDAM ET AL

The appellant must serve and file a proposed statement in superior court within 30 days after filing its notice under CRC 8.137(b)(1). CRC 8.137(c). Within 20 days after the appellant serves the proposed statement, the respondent may file and serve proposed amendments under CRC 8.137(e).

  • Hearing

    Sep 05, 2018

BERIONES VS IMH ASSETS CORP

In correcting and/or modifying a proposed settled statement, "[t]he trial court judge must not eliminate the appellant's specification of grounds of appeal from the proposed statement." (CRC 1.137(f)(5).)

  • Hearing

    Jan 30, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

JOE KLEIN ET AL VS ALBERT MALKA ET AL

A settled statement will provide an adequate record for an appellate court to investigate whether reversible error occurred. (People v. Hawthorne (1992) 4 Cal.4th 43, 66.) Safyari seeks to use a settled statement regarding eight hearings, none of which were reported. (Motion to Use Settled Statement at pp. 1–2.)

  • Hearing

    Apr 19, 2017

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

EVELYN BRIONES VS CASA LEADERS INC

Plaintiff moves for an order for a settled statement on appeal in lieu of reporter’s transcript. TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff Evelyn Briones’ motion for an order for a settled statement on appeal in lieu of reporter’s transcript is GRANTED. Plaintiff is to submit a settled statement for the Court’s signature.

  • Hearing

    Mar 30, 2017

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

LILLIAN CARTER ET AL VS UNIVERSAL STUDIOS INC ET AL

.: BC583946 Matter on calendar for: Unopposed Motion to Use a Settled Statement Tentative ruling: Plaintiffs have moved, under CRC, Rule 8.137 (a)(1), for an order to use a settled statement “for the hearing conducted on April 19, 2015.” The motion is unopposed. The Court assumes that the date is a typographical error, and that the moving parties actually seek an order to use a settled statement for the hearing conducted on April 19, 2016. The Court grants the motion.

  • Hearing

    Jan 24, 2017

  • Judge

    Brian S. Currey or John A. Slawson

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

TEMIKA S DIXON VS RANDALL G HUNZIKER

Defendant now moves to use settled statement in lieu of transcript. Plaintiff filed an opposition. As a transcript for the day in question is not available, it is appropriate to use a settled statement for that date. As to the other dates of trial, transcripts are available, so a settled statement for those dates is not appropriate. There is no prejudice to the plaintiff in allowing defendant to use a settled statement for the date of 4/4/17 only.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2017

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS. HOFFMAN

The Court's minute order dated November 21, 2017 (ROA # 76) states: "Appellant Judith Hoffman's request to proceed with a settled statement is granted by the Court. The Hearing on Settled Statement is scheduled for 12/07/2017 at 02:30PM before Judge Joel R. Wohlfeil." The parties are directed to meet and confer to agree upon, if reasonably possible, a settled statement.

  • Hearing

    Dec 04, 2017

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

BELLAGIO CONSTRUCTION INC VS HAZEM ZEKRY

s Motion for Settled Statement is DENIED. Bellagio Construction, Inc. seeks a settled statement for appellate purposes. California Rules of Court, Rule 8.137 provides a settled statement may be used where the proceedings were not reported. It is undisputed that Bellagio Construction, Inc. did not indicate it was electing to use a settled statement in its Notice of Designating the Record on Appeal ("NDRA").

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

LUIS CALDERON VS MICHAEL KOUTSOUKOS ET AL

Further the Court has no recollection nor notes indicating, as alleged in Appellant’s Proposed Settled Statement, that the Court “succinctly stated that even though [the Court] might be inclined to set aside the judgment, [the Court] would not be able to do so . . . .” (See Appellant’s Proposed Settled Statement, Attachment 6.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS. HOFFMAN

The Court's minute order dated November 21, 2017 (ROA # 76) states: "Appellant Judith Hoffman's request to proceed with a settled statement is granted by the Court. The Hearing on Settled Statement is scheduled for 12/07/2017 at 02:30PM before Judge Joel R. Wohlfeil." The parties are directed to meet and confer to agree upon, if reasonably possible, a settled statement.

  • Hearing

    Dec 04, 2017

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS. HOFFMAN

The Court's minute order dated November 21, 2017 (ROA # 76) states: "Appellant Judith Hoffman's request to proceed with a settled statement is granted by the Court. The Hearing on Settled Statement is scheduled for 12/07/2017 at 02:30PM before Judge Joel R. Wohlfeil." The parties are directed to meet and confer to agree upon, if reasonably possible, a settled statement.

  • Hearing

    Dec 04, 2017

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ANNIE PING JIANG ET AL VS DOCTORS BEST HOSPICE ET AL

(“Moving Defendants”) filed a proposed settled statement on appeal with the court, with proof of service by mail on Samuel and Samuel; Eugene S. Alkana; Michael Judah; Robert S. Robinson; and Deborah Morin, CSR. The proposed settled statement did not contain a hearing date. The court on August 25, 2020 set the hearing on the settled statement for September 29, 2020, directing Plaintiff to give notice to any interested parties in the Certificate of Mailing.

  • Hearing

    Oct 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MITRA RASHTI VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

Counsel are ordered to meet and confer and the court will set a date for determination of the settled statement.

  • Hearing

    Mar 12, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

LUIS CALDERON VS MICHAEL KOUTSOUKOS ET AL

Further the Court has no recollection nor notes indicating, as alleged in Appellant’s Proposed Settled Statement, that the Court “succinctly stated that even though [the Court] might be inclined to set aside the judgment, [the Court] would not be able to do so . . . .” (See Appellant’s Proposed Settled Statement, Attachment 6.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 10, 2020

MICHAEL BEAL ET AL VS. ROYAL OAK BAR ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Prepare A Settled Statement; Matter on calendar for Tuesday, June 25, 2013, Line 17, PLAINTIFFs MICHAEL BEAl & ASHLEY JACKSON's Motion To Prepare A Settled Statement. Hearing required. Plaintiffs shall provide a proof of service of the Motion to Prepare Settled Statement at the hearing. If Plaintiffs present a timely proof of service, the Court is inclined to continue the hearing to allow Defendants to oppose on the merits. =(302/MJM)

  • Hearing

    Jun 25, 2013

EDUARDO FLORES VS. SHARP GROSSMONT HOSPITAL

Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal (ROA 46), and a few days later requested a settled statement. ROA 49. A judgment of dismissal was entered April 12, 2017. ROA 52-53. By Minute Order filed April 25, 2017 (ROA 55-56), the court ordered defense counsel to prepare a proposed settled statement. Defense counsel complied, and submitted the proposed settled statement on May 16, 2017 with a proof of service dated the previous day. ROA 59.

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.