Most civil practioners know the basic rule: the Notice must be filed within 60 days after service of notice of entry of the judgment or appealable order (Rule of Court 8.104(a)). But that only begs the questions: When was the judgment or order entered? What constitutes notice of that entry? And what about those extensions of time for post-judgment motions? 

The fact is that calculating the deadline can be a trap even for the wary. For example, notice of entry of a judgment is accomplished by either service of a document entitled “Notice of Entry” or by service of a file-stamped copy of the judgment itself (Rule of Court 8.104(a) 1, 2). That is, there need not be service of a formal “Notice of Entry”. Danger lurks when your office receives a bare copy of the judgment accompanied by a proof of service – your clock has begun to tick!

Consider, for another example, the impact of filing a motion for reconsideration from an appealable order pursuant to Civ. Pro. §1008. As long as that motion is “valid” – that is, timely and otherwise not facially defective – it will extend the time for filing a notice of appeal from the underlying order (Rule of Court 8.108 (d)). But the length of that extension of time is not consistent with other extensions provided by similar, post-judgment motions such as those for new trial.

A motion for new trial will extend the time for filing a notice of appeal to the earlier of 30 days after service of a notice of an order denying the motion or 30 days after denial of the motion by operation of law (trial courts eventually lose jurisdiction to rule on the motion – see Civ. Pro. §§ 660; Rule of Court 8.108(a)). But a trial court may still rule on a motion for new trial after a notice of appeal is filed (Varian Medical Systems, Inc. v. Delfino (2005) 35 Cal.4th 180). Thus an early notice of appeal will not prejudice your client’s rights to have the new trial motion considered.

On the other hand, a motion for reconsideration of an appealable order extends the notice of appeal time by 30 days after the clerk or a party serves notice of an order denying the motion or 90 days after the date of filing the motion whether the trial court rules or not (Rule of Court 108(d)). Unlike motions for new trial, there is no statutory cut-off for the trial court to rule on a motion for reconsideration. But here’s the trap: unlike a motion for new trial, the trial court loses jurisdiction to rule on the motion for reconsideration once a notice of appeal is filed (Betz v. Pankow (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 931).

Thus it is possible to file a motion for reconsideration from an appealable order, wait for the court to rule before filing a notice of appeal, but then be forced to file the notice of appeal as the 90 day deadline approaches and thereby terminate the trial court’s jurisdiction to even consider your motion!

What’s the solution? Wait for the Legislature to make the notice of appeal deadlines uniform. Until then, when in doubt, call an appellate specialist for help.