Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Citation
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Parent Document
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 2020-10-21
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4799030/reyes-v-kruger/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (35)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
- Reyes v. Kruger (2020)
Full Text
492 chars5The record appears to contain two copies of the proof of service to the November 22, 2016 order regarding special motion to strike. Although one of those copies appears to omit counsel for Rothbard, the other—which is the file-stamped copy— includes counsel for all three parties. Either version would have triggered the 60-day deadline based on the court clerk’s service and filing of the notice of entry of judgment “on the party filing the notice of appeal . . . .” (Rule 8.104(a)(1)(A).)