Chase Livio v. Savin
On September 22, 2011, the trial court denied defendant and appellant Ronald R. Savin’s motion for costs and attorney fees as untimely under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1702.[1] Savin appeals, contending that the trial court erred because his motion was timely filed under rules 3.1702 and 8.104(a).[2]
Since the sole issue in the case is a legal issue, we apply a de novo standard of review.
Rule 3.1702(b)(1) applies to claims for statutory attorney fees and in contract actions. It provides: “A notice of motion to claim attorney’s fees for services up to and including the rendition of judgment in the trial court—including attorney’s fees on an appeal before the rendition of judgment in the trial court—must be served and filed within the time for filing a notice of appeal under rules 8.104 and 8.108 in an unlimited civil case . . . .â€
Rule 8.104(a)(1) provides that an appeal must be filed “on or before the earliest of: [¶] (A) 60 days after the superior court clerk serves on the party filing the notice of appeal a document entitled ‘Notice of Entry’ of judgment or a file-stamped copy of the judgment, showing the date either was served; [¶] (B) 60 days after the party filing the notice of appeal serves or is served by a party with a document entitled ‘Notice of Entry’ of judgment or a file-stamped copy of the judgment, accompanied by proof of service; or [¶] (C) 180 days after entry of judgment.â€[3]
Comments on Chase Livio v. Savin