VANDERMOON v. SANWONG — Fear Not Law

<h1>VANDERMOON v. SANWONG</h1> <h2>Filed 8/28/06</h2> CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin) <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td width="394" valign="top"> RONALD VANDERMOON et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. CLARA JOYCE SANWONG et al., Defendants and Appellants. </td> <td width="230" valign="top"> C050789 (Super. Ct. No. CV011455) </td> </tr> </table> APPEAL from a judgment of the <a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">Superior Court of San Joaquin</a> <a href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">County</a>, Elizabeth Humphreys, Judge. Affirmed. Paul R. Bartleson for Defendants and Appellants. No appearance for Plaintiffs and Respondents. Relying on <a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">Code of Civil Procedure</a> section 473,<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">[1]</a> defendants Suwich Sanwong and Clara Joyce Sanwong (hereafter collectively defendants) moved to set aside a judgment entered against them following a trial conducted in their absence on the ground that their attorney failed to inform them of the trial date. The trial court concluded that defendants were not entitled to either <a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">discretionary or mandatory relief</a> under section 473, subdivision (b) (hereafter section 473(b)) because the motion was not made within a reasonable time, and the judgment was neither a â€