Fear Not Law Articles: Marriage of Tran and Nguyen

Marriage of Tran and Nguyen

Filed 10/23/08 Marriage of Tran and Nguyen CA2/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re the Marriage of
MY PHUONG TRAN and
NAM TRUNG NGUYEN,

___________________________________

MY PHUONG TRAN NGUYEN,

Petitioner,

NAM TRUNG NGUYEN,

Respondent and Appellant.

B205990

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. GD041740)

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Nori A. Walla, Judge. Appeal dismissed.

Law Firm of Toby Tran and Toby Tran for Respondent and Appellant.

Law Office of Roman Vu & Associates and Roman Quang Vu for Petitioner.

_______________________________________

This is an appeal by a husband from a restraining order issued in favor of his wife and their children. From our examination of the appellate record, it did not appear that the husbands notice of appeal was timely filed. We therefore directed the attorneys who represent the parties to appear at the oral argument scheduled for this case and be prepared to discuss only the issue of the timeliness of the appeal. We advised them that if we ultimately determined that the appeal was timely filed, the substantive issues raised by the parties in their appellate briefs would be addressed at oral argument on a future date, but if we determined the appeal was not timely, it would be dismissed. At oral argument husbands attorney conceded that the notice of appeal was not timely filed.^{^[1]}

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed. Each party shall bear their own costs on appeal.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

CROSKEY, J.

We Concur:

KLEIN, P. J.

ALDRICH, J.

Publication courtesy of San Diego pro bono legal advice.

Analysis and review provided by Poway Property line attorney.

San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com

^{^[1]} We note that when husband filed his notice of appeal, wife did not file a motion to dismiss the appeal on timeliness grounds. That resulted in the unnecessary preparation of the appellate record and the appellate briefs. Therefore, wife will not recover her appellate costs.

Description	This is an appeal by a husband from a restraining order issued in favor of his wife and their children. From our examination of the appellate record, it did not appear that the husbands notice of appeal was timely filed. We therefore directed the attorneys who represent the parties to appear at the oral argument scheduled for this case and be prepared to discuss only the issue of the timeliness of the appeal. Court advised them that if we ultimately determined that the appeal was timely filed, the substantive issues raised by the parties in their appellate briefs would be addressed at oral argument on a future date, but if we determined the appeal was not timely, it would be dismissed. At oral argument husbands attorney conceded that the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.