Darden Painting v. Glass Architects
Glass Architects (Glass) appeals from the trial court’s determinations regarding whether or not it was the prevailing party entitled to costs as against four different parties who are respondents in this appeal, after a jury trial to determine all of the parties’ liability for defective work on a community activity center in Newark, California. Respondents disagree with Glass’s numerous assertions of error, and also argue that we lack jurisdiction to consider Glass’s appellate claims because Glass did not timely appeal from the court’s judgment.
We conclude that we lack jurisdiction to consider all but one of Glass’s appellate claims because they are untimely made. As for the one claim that has been timely made, against respondent Tnemec Company, Inc. and California Coating Consultants, Inc. (Tnemec), we affirm the trial court’s ruling.
Comments on Darden Painting v. Glass Architects