Does a notice of appeal from an unappealable order denying new trial have to be interpreted as an appeal from the underlying order?

Although the notice of appeal is therefore in error, we do not believe that the error is fatal to the appeal. Notices of appeal are to be liberally construed in favor of their sufficiency, and errors are overlooked so long as it is reasonably clear what appellant was trying to appeal from, and the respondent could not possibly have been misled or prejudiced by the error. (See Walker v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2005) 35 Cal.4th 15, 20-22 [notice of appeal from unappealable order denying new trial should be liberally construed to encompass appeal from underlying judgment, where no prejudice to respondent].) If the underlying order was independently appealable, we would not be able to review it on its merits unless the notice of appeal was timely filed as to that order. (See Crotty v. Trader (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 765, 768-769.)