Sierra v. Melbostad CA1/1 ( 2013 )


Menu:
  • Filed 6/25/13 Sierra v. Melbostad CA1/1
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
    California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for
    publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication
    or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
    FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
    DIVISION ONE
    REGULO SIERRA,
    Plaintiff and Appellant,
    A135899
    v.
    PAUL H. MELBOSTAD et al.,                                            (San Francisco City & County
    Super. Ct. No. CGC-11-516154)
    Defendants and Respondents.
    MEMORANDUM OPINION1
    Plaintiff Regulo Sierra sued his former attorneys, defendants Paul H. Melbostad
    and his law firm, for legal malpractice. The trial court sustained defendants’ demurrer to
    plaintiff’s first amended complaint without leave to amend on the ground the malpractice
    claims were time-barred.
    Plaintiff, in pro. per. both here and below, purports to appeal from (1) the order
    sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend and (2) an order denying reconsideration
    of that order.
    Neither order is appealable. (Nowlon v. Koram Ins. Center, Inc. (1991)
    
    1 Cal.App.4th 1437
    , 1440; Annette F. v. Sharon S. (2005) 
    130 Cal.App.4th 1448
    , 1458–
    1459; 9 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Appeal, § 154, pp. 230–231, § 165,
    1
    We use the memorandum opinion format pursuant to California Standards of
    Judicial Administration, section 8.1.
    1
    pp. 241–242.) Accordingly, we hereby dismiss this appeal.2
    ______________________
    Sepulveda, J.*
    We concur:
    ______________________
    Dondero, Acting P.J.
    ______________________
    Banke, J.
    * Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division
    Four, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California
    Constitution.
    2
    We resolve this appeal without oral argument because we are not deciding it on
    the merits. (See Moles v. Regents of University of California (1982) 
    32 Cal.3d 867
    , 871.)
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A135899

Filed Date: 6/25/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/31/2014