|
P0223 In dicta, the Second District said that if the Code of Civil Procedure section providing that a request for reconsideration of an order must be based upon new or different facts interfered with a court's sua sponte reconsideration of its own interim order it would be unconstitutional, and if it were read to apply to reconsideration on motion but not to sua sponte reconsideration, it would defy statements of policy clearly made by the legislature. [The court found there were new and different circumstances, so it was not required to interpret the statute.]CitationKOLLANDER CONSTRUCTION v SUPERIOR COURT (Reconsideration) 98 CA4 304 [See: CCP 473, 1008; Darling v Kritt 75 CA4 1148, T/AT 12/99; Case v City Thrift 2002 CalAppLexis 4222, E/AT 7/02]
|
|
