Appellate Practice,
Civil Procedure
Apr. 10, 2024
SB 365's departure from the Bielski rule for FAA cases may lead to further litigation
SB 365 could lead to more litigation over FAA preemption, trial court discretion, and the efficiency and fairness of proceeding with the case while an appeal is pending.
Patrick Burns
Partner
Hanson Bridgett LLP
Email: pburns@hansonbridgett.com
Patrick is a partner in the firm's Appellate Practice. Patrick focuses on writs and appeals, as well as law and motion in the state and federal courts. A former litigator at a global law firm, Patrick has experience litigating high-stakes disputes. He can be reached at pburns@hansonbridgett.com and his blog posts can be read at www.appellateinsight.com.
Gary A. Watt
Partner
Hanson Bridgett LLP
State Bar Approved, Certified Appellate Specialist
Email: gwatt@hansonbridgett.com
Gary chairs Hanson Bridgett's Appellate Practice. He is a State Bar-approved, certified appellate specialist. In addition to writs and appeals, his practice includes anti-SLAPP and post-trial motions as well as trial and appellate consulting. His blog posts can be read at www.appellateinsight.com.
It is well known to California appellate practitioners that the perfecting of an appeal stays proceedings in the trial court as to the judgment or order appealed from or “upon matters embraced therein or affected thereby.” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 916(a). The stay under Section 916(a) is automatic, and the trial court lacks jurisdiction over any matters affected by the order. (Varian Med. Sys., Inc. v. Delfino (2005) 35 Cal.4th 180, 195.)
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In