Postjudgment Filing Extension Upheld by Supreme Court

May 13, 2025 | MedLegalNews.comPostjudgment Filing Extension: The California Supreme Court ruled that an employer should have been granted an extension to file postjudgment motions after a civil judgment in a wage-and-hour case. The decision clarifies when trial courts must grant relief under California’s Code of Civil Procedure.

Procedural Background

The case involved an employer that missed the standard 15-day deadline to file motions for a new trial and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV). The employer argued that the court clerk failed to properly serve the notice of entry of judgment, which would have triggered the statutory deadline. As a result, the employer filed its motions late and requested relief under Code of Civil Procedure § 473(b), which allows for relief due to mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.

The trial court denied the request, and the Court of Appeal upheld that denial.

High Court Reverses

The California Supreme Court unanimously reversed. The justices concluded that Section 473(b) did apply and that the trial court had abused its discretion by refusing to allow the late filings. The high court emphasized that litigants should not suffer penalties when procedural missteps occur through no fault of their own.

Justice Goodwin Liu, writing for the court, stated: “When a party seeks to preserve its rights through good-faith reliance on proper procedures and a breakdown occurs, trial courts should exercise their discretion to prevent injustice.”

Impact on Employers and Civil Litigants

The ruling strengthens procedural protections for parties who rely on the timely delivery of court notices. Employers and legal counsel should closely monitor court filings and service timelines but now have firmer grounds to seek relief if clerical or procedural errors prevent timely responses. Postjudgment Filing Extension

This decision may influence how courts handle extensions and late filings in civil cases statewide, particularly where parties face technical or service-related delays.


📰 Read More from MedLegalNews.com:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top