How this document has been cited
Although the issues of fraud, mistake, or inadvertence on which the recall of a remittitur depend are distinct from the issues on the merits of the appeal, they are usually so closely related thereto that the court can determine them only by a review of its decision on the merits
- in People v. Randazzo, 1957 and 4 similar citations
While a recall may not be directed for the purpose of correcting judicial error, it is properly ordered where the remittitur has been secured by fraud or imposition or where the court has been led to decide the case under a misapprehension as to the true facts
- in McClearen v. Superior Court, 1955 and 3 similar citations
The theory is that when an appellate court recalls its remittitur it does not "resume" a jurisdiction it has lost, but, because of the facts requiring the recall, it has never lost jurisdiction—that the judgment recalled is a nullity and should be disregarded
- in People v. Rivers, 1967 and 3 similar citations
Court will assert its jurisdiction and recall the case. Against an order or judgment improvidently granted, upon a false suggestion, or under a mistake as to the facts of the case, this Court will afford relief after the adjournment of the term; and will, if necessary, recall a remittitur and stay proceedings in the Court below. This is not done, however, upon the principle of …
- in In re McGee, 1951 and 3 similar citations
A motion to recall a remittitur is an extraordinary remedy that is only exercised in cases of fraud or imposition practiced upon the court or upon the opposite party or where a judgment is improvidently granted, upon a false suggestion, or under a mistake as to the facts of the case
- in Haydel v. Morton, 1938 and one similar citation
The statutes and rules reasonably regulating the right of appeal might just as well be repealed if any such rule were to be adopted.[2] A remittitur may be recalled only where the judgment sought to be recalled was secured by fraud or imposition on the court
- in People v. Egan, 1947 and one similar citation
A mistake of fact on the part of an appellate tribunal which results in prejudicial error or a miscarriage of justice affords a proper ground for recall and correction of the remittitur
- in People v. Bartges, 1954 and one similar citation
It may not now by the device of a motion to recall the remittitur secure an additional rehearing on the merits and thereby obtain a modification of the judgment or a different judgment
- in Southwestern Inv. Corp. v. City of LA, 1952 and one similar citation
Cited by
58 Cal. 2d 133 - Cal: Supreme Court 1962
48 Cal. 2d 484 - Cal: Supreme Court 1957
38 Cal. 2d 623 - Cal: Supreme Court 1952
220 P. 2d 631 - Nev: Supreme Court 1950
92 Cal. App. 2d 539 - Cal: Court of Appeal 1949
28 Cal. App. 2d 383 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate Dist., 1st Div. 1938
Cal: Court of Appeal, 4th Appellate Dist., 1st Div. 2020
3 P. 3d 286 - Cal: Supreme Court 2000
[CITATION] California Civil Practice: Procedure
JR Lambden… - 1992