Q: Validation of basis for standard of review requested, with explanation.
Mixed question for standard of review of appeal.
Appealable order was: denied order to set aside dismissal against one of defendants.
Dismissal was entered by court on premise that settlement was achieved.
But - dismissal was actually entered on agreement on intentions, that was not achieved because Defendant did not comply with agreement on intentions.
There was a change in law in respect to basis for entering dismissal : from section 581 (b)(2) to section 581 (c).
Change of law is primary for de novo standard of review, with contributing clearly erroneous standard of review with minimal deference on trial's court's error misinterpreting documential evidence of intentions that did not result in settlement. Evidence was provided by plaintiff with motion for reconsideration of order denying reinstatement of legal action.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
- California
- (916) 704-3009
- View Profile
- Answered
A:
The standard of review for your appeal involves multiple elements that support a de novo review, which would give the appellate court full authority to review the trial court's decision anew.
The primary basis for de novo review stems from the change in statutory authority from CCP § 581(b)(2) to § 581(c), as questions of law and statutory interpretation are reviewed de novo. Additionally, when reviewing documentary evidence (here, the agreement of intentions), the appellate court can independently review the evidence without deference to the trial court's interpretation, particularly when the trial court's interpretation appears to be clearly erroneous.
The motion for reconsideration presents additional evidence showing that no actual settlement was achieved, despite the court's premise for dismissal. Given that the dismissal was based on an unachieved condition (defendant's non-compliance with the agreement), combined with the change in statutory basis and documentary evidence interpretation, you have strong grounds to argue for de novo review. This would allow the appellate court to examine the entire matter fresh, without being bound by the trial court's conclusions.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
