California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Nicholson v. Mohamed, B238392 (Cal. App. 2012):
4. Although the trial court did not rule specifically on the objections, those objections are preserved for appeal. (See Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 512, 527, 532, 534.) Moreover, defendants do not dispute plaintiffs' contention that the evidence was inadmissible or that plaintiffs cannot, on appeal, rely on the inadmissibility of that evidence. Even if the evidence was properly before the trial court, it does not establish that defendants did not receive notice of the August 4, 2011, hearing because the motion to compel providing notice that it was to be heard on August 4, 2011, was served on defendants' counsel when he was acting in that capacity. In addition, as noted below, defendants had notice of the August 26, 2011, OSC hearing, and they did not provide a sufficient basis to vacate the default for defendants' failure to appear at that hearing.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.