Sacramento Mun. Utility Dist. v. FCC Corp.
The opinion in the above matter, filed July 9, 2012, is modified to insert a footnote at the end of the first full paragraph on page 46, as follows:
In a petition for rehearing, Fru-Con argues that we must grant rehearing because we affirm the summary adjudication on a ground not relied upon by the trial court without having given Fru-Con the opportunity to address that new ground in supplemental briefing. Specifically, Fru-Con contends our conclusion that the section C work was not a separable part of the construction project lies at odds with the trial court’s finding the section C concrete work was separable. We reject Fru-Con’s contention.
Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (m)(2), requires us to grant rehearing if we affirm summary adjudication “on a ground not relied upon by the trial court.†(Italics added.) Section 437c does not compel supplemental briefing if we happen to disagree with a finding that was not relied upon by the trial court in granting summary adjudication.
Comments on Sacramento Mun. Utility Dist. v. FCC Corp.