Garamallo v. Daley 3/4/11 CA1/5

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » California » Court of Appeal » 2011 » Garamallo v. Daley 3/4/11 CA1/5

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: A128979

Case Date: 06/09/2011

Preview:Filed 3/4/11 Garamallo v. Daley CA1/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE

LOWELL A. GARAMALLO, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WILLIAM P. DALEY et al., Defendants and Respondents. (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG10506542) A128979

Plaintiff Lowell A. Garamallo (appellant)1 appeals, in propria persona, the April 26, 2010 voiding of his complaint against defendants2 due to his failure to pay the requisite trial court filing fees. He contends the trial courts dismissal of his complaint was an act exceeding its jurisdiction, an abuse of its discretion, and a violation of his constitutional rights to due process and access to the courts. We conclude the appeal is untimely and must be dismissed. On March 18, 2010, appellant filed a civil complaint against respondents alleging numerous causes of action including legal malpractice and breach of contract.

1 2

Appellant is an inmate at Pelican Bay State Prison.

The defendants are William P. Daley, Seth Chazin, Paul Upton, Miller and Associates Law Firm, Willis Shalita, Ester Rogers, and the State Bar of California (collectively respondents). No respondent has filed a brief on appeal, and the sole record on appeal is an appellants appendix. 1

On March 29, 2010, the trial court issued a form "Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)" regarding appellants request to waive court fees filed on March 29. The order stated "The court denies your request as follows:" "Warning! If you miss the deadline below, the court cannot process your request for hearing or the court papers you filed with your original request. . . ." (Boldface in original.) The order also stated the court denied the fee waiver request because the sections on the form regarding appellants monthly income, household income, money and property and monthly expenses were blank or incomplete. The order stated "You have 10 days after the clerk gives notice of this order (see date below) to pay your fees and costs, or file a new revised request providing the incomplete information." Appellant was served by mail with the order on March 30, 2010. On April 14, 2010, the trial court received, but did not file, a letter from appellant to the court clerk and attached documents intended as a "refiling of fee waiver per crt order." On April 26, 2010, the court clerk filed and served on appellant a form "Notice of Administrative Void."3 A checked box on the form stated, "Application for Waiver of Court Fees and Costs Denied." The form also stated, "You are hereby notified that the Complaint filed on March 18, 2010 is hereby set aside and deemed void as to Plaintiff, Bank of America, N.A., for failure to post the required filing fee in the amount of $355.00." On April 28, 2010, the court clerk sent appellant a letter stating, "Your request to file Rejection Letter has been rejected for the following reason: [

Download Garamallo v. Daley 3/4/11 CA1/5.pdf