How to I give court jurisdiction to modify its ADVISORY in an order after hearing?

Question

California: Court found that Plaintiff's CH-100 had no merit. In order after hearing Court ADVISED how Plaintiff should return property to Defendant. Plaintiff did her own thing and did not respond to Defendant's written requests to pick up property. Defendant filed a number of expartes and then a CH-600 to ask the court to clarify its ADVISORY. Court said it didn't have jurisdiction because the CH-100 was closed. How do I reopen the case, giving the court Jurisdiction to clarify the ADVISORY making it an order to return the property?  Use a CCP 473 and Notice Motion for New Trial?  Thank you.

James L. Arrasmith · Answer

Under California law, if you want the court to modify or clarify an advisory in an order after a hearing in a closed case, you would typically need to file a new motion or petition to reopen the case and give the court jurisdiction to address the issue. 
 
In your situation, since the original CH-100 (Request for Civil Harassment Restraining Orders) was denied and the case is closed, you could consider the following options: 
 
1. File a motion for reconsideration under Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 1008: This allows a party to request that the court reconsider a previous order based on new or different facts, circumstances, or law. However, this motion must be filed within 10 days of service of the order, so it may not be applicable in your case if the deadline has passed. 
 
2. File a motion for relief under CCP section 473(b): This section allows the court to grant relief from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against a party due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. This motion must be filed within a reasonable time, not exceeding six months after the order was entered. 
 
3. File a new civil action: Depending on the nature of the property dispute, you may need to file a separate civil action (e.g., a complaint for claim and delivery or conversion) to address the issue of returning the property. This would be a new, independent case from the original CH-100 matter. 
 
A motion for a new trial under CCP section 657 is typically used to request a new trial after a judgment has been entered and is not likely to be the appropriate procedure in your situation. 
 
It is highly recommended that you consult with an attorney who specializes in civil litigation and restraining order cases to determine the most appropriate course of action based on the specific facts of your case and the applicable legal deadlines.

Q: How to I give court jurisdiction to modify its ADVISORY in an order after hearing?