At the time, he was preoccupied with making a record for his jury instructions. Had he objected, J.A.T. would have had to show good cause for a dismissal without prejudice. Counsel argued that J.A.T. could not have shown good cause because it had not produced sufficient evidence to present an alter ego jury instruction. Consequently, Reed would have been dismissed with prejudice. Under section 473, which applies to plaintiffs and defendants alike, a party is relieved from the consequences of his or her attorney's mistake, inadvertence, surprise or neglect.
Relief is mandatory regardless whether the attorney's conduct is excusable.
Relief must be granted when the application is timely, in proper form, and accompanied by the attorney's sworn statement of fault. However, there must be adverse consequences to the client that are attributable to the attorney's conduct. The appellate court reversed the dismissal and granted relief pursuant to the section 473 motion. This decision clarifies that relief is mandatory when a party complies with section 473's requirements and provides a sworn statement of attorney fault, regardless whether the fault is excusable. This publication is intended for general information purposes only and does not constitute nor is intended to constitute legal advice.