http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2009/03/18/in-re-bs/ Appellate Attorney Greg May on Practice and Developments in the Appellate Courts of California Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:28:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2009/03/18/in-re-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-5701 Anonymous Mon, 30 Mar 2009 21:20:11 +0000 http://www.calblogofappeal.com/?p=1424#comment-5701 As I see it, the client had some possible defenses. First, was he served orrectly per the statutes of personal service? Did he try to vacate the order(s) ? Also, was a court commissioner involved, if so did the court accuire subject matter jurisdiction by way of Cal VI< art 21 obtain written stips from both parties as required? Lacking the required stips ( Bernie v Stevens Cal 1)(Settlemire v Settlemire 2nd app div 6, SLO County) state sno commissioner may issue a restraining order without a stip from the parties. As I see it, the client had some possible defenses. First, was he served orrectly per the statutes of personal service? Did he try to vacate the order(s) ? Also, was a court commissioner involved, if so did the court accuire subject matter jurisdiction by way of Cal VI< art 21 obtain written stips from both parties as required? Lacking the required stips ( Bernie v Stevens Cal 1)(Settlemire v Settlemire 2nd app div 6, SLO County) state sno commissioner may issue a restraining order without a stip from the parties.

]]> http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2009/03/18/in-re-bs/comment-page-1/#comment-5663 Jack of All Arguments Thu, 19 Mar 2009 06:48:58 +0000 http://www.calblogofappeal.com/?p=1424#comment-5663 I agree, but the making of the argument is perhaps explained by the fact that the father's counsel was appointed. That is, appointed counsel was trying to make whatever argument he could (maybe to avoid a wende situation??) and that was the best he had. No inside knowledge -- that is just what it looks like to me. I agree, but the making of the argument is perhaps explained by the fact that the father’s counsel was appointed. That is, appointed counsel was trying to make whatever argument he could (maybe to avoid a wende situation??) and that was the best he had. No inside knowledge — that is just what it looks like to me.

]]>