legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Lee v. Rich
Howard Rich purchased a single‑family residence at an execution sale conducted to satisfy a judgment against Yung‑Shen Steven Lee. Rich was a third party purchaser; the plaintiff and judgment creditor was Spyglass Hill Community Association (the HOA), which managed the common interest development of which the residence was a part. After the sale, the trial court granted Lee’s motion to vacate the judgment on the ground it had been obtained by the HOA through fraud. Soon thereafter, the court granted Lee’s motion for restitution and cancelled the sheriff’s deed to Rich. Although Rich was not a party to the HOA’s judgment against Lee, Rich moved for reconsideration of the order vacating the judgment. The trial court denied the motion for reconsideration.
Rich appeals from two orders: (1) the order denying his motion for reconsideration and (2) the order granting Lee’s motion for restitution and cancellation of the sheriff’s deed of sale.
After the matter was briefed, we issued an order stating we were considering whether to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and inviting the parties to submit supplemental letter briefs addressing three issues of appellate jurisdiction. Both Rich and Lee filed supplemental letter briefs, which we have considered. We conclude we have no jurisdiction over this appeal and decline to treat it as a petition for writ of mandate. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale