Zarate v. Manuel -
Appeal Costs Deadline Extended by 1013

Zarate v. ManuelCase No. A125662 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Mar. 30, 2010) Unpublished

Commentary about Zarate v. Manuel

DCA records

Trial Court Name:Alameda County Superior Court

MainCounty:AlamedaTrial Court

Case Number:RG05241380

"We need not address this question because, even assuming the clerk's entry on January 22 constitutes sending "notice of issuance" of the remittitur, respondents had the benefit of Code of Civil Procedure section 1013 (section 1013), which extended the time to respond to such notice an additional five days. That section states, in part, as follows:

"The service is complete at the time of the deposit, but any period of notice and any right or duty to do any act or make any response within any period or on a date certain after the service of the document, which time period or date is prescribed by statute or rule of court, shall be extended five calendar days, upon service by mail, if the place of address and the place of mailing is within the State of California . . . but the extension shall not apply to extend the time for filing notice of intention to move for new trial, notice of intention to move to vacate judgment pursuant to Section 663a, or notice of appeal. This extension applies in the absence of a specific exception provided for by this section or other statute or rule of court." (Code Civ. Proc., § 1013, italics added.) "

Nothing contained herein is tendered as nor should it be considered as legal advice.  What is legal is not necessarily justice.  Almost all of reality is non-"published", ergo, what is legally affirmed is always a retarded misrepresentation of reality.   Use at your own risk!