Docket (Register of Actions)
Fung v. Mancia et al.
Division 5
Case Number A153727

Date Description Notes

02/26/2018 Notice of appeal lodged/received. Filed 02-13-18 by John S. Rueppel as counsel for Plaintiff Theda Fung

02/26/2018 Notified parties of local rules and procedures.

02/26/2018 Filing fee. Check #4022 – O’Neil Rueppel LLP

02/27/2018 Civil case information statement filed. Plaintiff and Appellant: Theda Fung
Attorney: John Rueppel Copy of order attached

05/31/2018 Appellant’s notice designating record on appeal filed in trial court on: 02-21-18 designating 8.124 WITH RT

05/31/2018 Notice to reporter to prepare transcript. 05-25-18

07/06/2018 Record on appeal filed. R-1

07/24/2018 Returned document for non-conformance. opening brief; missing certificate of interested entities (CRC 8.208), missing service on superior court (CRC 8.212(c)(1))

07/24/2018 Appellant’s opening brief. Plaintiff and Appellant: Theda Fung
Attorney: John Rueppel

07/24/2018 Appellant’s appendix filed. vol. 1 of 1

07/24/2018 Note: according to civil case information statement, Samir Daher and Shideh Rostami are not parties to this appeal

08/22/2018 Requested – extension of time.
Respondent’s brief. Requested for 10/22/2018 By 60 Day(s)

08/22/2018 Opposition filed. Opposition to Respondent’s Application for Extension of Time to File Brief, Declaration in Support, from attorney John Rueppel for appellant

08/22/2018 Granted – extension of time.
Respondent’s brief. Due on 09/24/2018 By 32 Day(s)

09/24/2018 Requested – extension of time.
Respondent’s brief. Requested for 10/24/2018 By 30 Day(s)

09/24/2018 Opposition filed. Opposition to Respondent’s Application for Extension of Time to File Brief, Declaration in Support, from attorney John Rueppel for appellant

09/24/2018 Denied – extension of time.

09/25/2018 Respondent notified re failure to file respondent’s brief. Defendant and Respondent: Susana Mancia
Attorney: Victor H. Toscano

10/10/2018 Respondent’s brief. Defendant and Respondent: Susana Mancia
Attorney: Victor H. Toscano

10/23/2018 Appellant’s reply brief. Plaintiff and Appellant: Theda Fung
Attorney: John Rueppel

10/23/2018 Case fully briefed.

10/24/2018 Filed proof of service. of reply brief on superior court

11/01/2018 Oral argument waiver notice sent.

11/08/2018 Request for oral argument filed by: attorney John Rueppel for appellant

11/08/2018 Request for oral argument filed by: attorney Victor Toscano for respondent

01/22/2019 Letter sent to: all counsel: The Court requests supplemental briefing on whether this appeal should be dismissed as having been taken from a nonappealable order when there appears to be no default judgment. (Misic v. Segars (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1149, 1154; Velicescu v. Pauna (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 1521, 1522.) Such briefing shall not exceed five (5) single spaced pages, shall be in letter format, and shall be filed no later than January 31, 2019. The parties shall advise the Court in the same letter as to whether oral argument is still requested.

01/31/2019 Supplemental brief filed by: Defendant and Respondent: Susana Mancia
Attorney: Victor H. Toscano

02/06/2019 Email received from: John Rueppel, attorney for appellant Fung; he will not file supplemental brief

02/20/2019 Calendar notice sent. Calendar date: March 28, 2019 at 11:00 a.m.

03/21/2019 Order filed. BY THE COURT: Oral argument in this matter is set to be heard at 11:00 a.m. on March 28, 2019. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 8.256(c), each side is allowed a total of 10 minutes to present argument. The Court requests that counsel focus on the following issue: Should this appeal be dismissed as having been taken from a nonappealable order when there is no default judgment? (Misic v. Segars (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1149, 1154; Velicescu v. Pauna (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 1521, 1522.)

03/28/2019 Cause argued and submitted.

04/09/2019 Opinion filed. (Signed Unpublished) The appeal is dismissed. Costs to respondent.

06/11/2019 Remittitur issued.

06/11/2019 Case complete.