From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sullivan v. Valverde

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division
Mar 20, 2008
No. B193938 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 20, 2008)

Opinion


MARK FRANCIS SULLIVAN, JR., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. GEORGE VALVERDE, as Director, etc., Defendant and Respondent. 2d Civil No. B193938 California Court of Appeal, Second District, Sixth DivisionMarch 20, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Ventura County, Super. Ct. No. CIV 240286

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on February 19, 2008, be modified as follows:

Commencing at the bottom of page 5, the paragraph that begins with "Glatman, however, concerned a computer printout" and ending at the top of page 6 with "is not determinative of the date the BAC analysis was performed and recorded," add as footnote 2 the following footnote, which will require renumbering of a subsequent footnote.

2 Appellant filed a petition for rehearing urging us to consider a factual matter concerning the laboratory analysis report. He did not raise this matter before the DMV, in his opening brief nor at oral argument. His allegation has no merit, is irrelevant, and does not affect our analysis as set forth in the opinion.

There is no change in judgment.

Appellant's petition for rehearing is denied.


Summaries of

Sullivan v. Valverde

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division
Mar 20, 2008
No. B193938 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 20, 2008)
Case details for

Sullivan v. Valverde

Case Details

Full title:MARK FRANCIS SULLIVAN, JR., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. GEORGE VALVERDE…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division

Date published: Mar 20, 2008

Citations

No. B193938 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 20, 2008)