Appellate jurisdiction might not interest many practitioners other than appellate lawyers, but it sure is on the Supreme Court’s radar of late. Last month, the court addressed the appealability of superior court rulings on administrative mandate petitions. Yesterday, the court agreed to review a decision regarding standing to appeal a discovery sanctions order. Today, in Ryan v. Rosenfeld, the Supreme Court holds that an order denying a statutory motion to vacate a judgment is appealable.
The court’s unanimous opinion by Justice Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar holds that a superior court order denying a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 663 to vacate a final judgment is appealable because the Legislature has authorized appeals from orders made after appealable judgments. The court concludes, “A statutory appeal from a ruling denying a section 663 motion is indeed distinct from an appeal of a trial court judgment and is permissible without regard to whether the issues raised in the appeal from the denial of the section 663 motion overlap with issues that were or could have been raised in an appeal of the judgment.”
The court vacates the order of the First District, Division Four, Court of Appeal that had dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal. It overrules — as an apparent “oversight” and an “unexplained departure” from precedent — a statement on appealability in one of its 1978 opinions. The court also disapproves 2008 and 1928 (!) Third District opinions, a 2007 opinion by the Second District, Division Seven, and a 2004 opinion by the First District, Division Four.
