Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California

If the courts err, they will almost always err on the side of the non-attorney. You ought to read Canon 3 and the advisory comments to the California and ABA Judicial Code...your assumption that there is some special ties between the courts and an HOA is false. Your allegation that the Court some how bends the rules to favor attorneys is incorrect. Courts will have more patience with a pro per. The law also states that self represented litigants are to be held to the same standard as attorneys. Judges walk a fine line there. The reason it seems biased is that an attorney has spent years studying this stuff, has learned, has paid for resources, studied about that part of the law and a self represented party who has little understanding gets easily overwhelmed. I wonder if you do surgery on yourself, I wonder if you fix your own car, I wonder if you fill your own cavities, I wonder if you ... Well maybe you get the point.

An order sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend is not appealable.

Where a demurrer is sustained without leave to amend as to all causes of action, the court enters a judgment dismissing the action. The appeal is taken from the judgment of dismissal.

There is no immediate appeal where a demurrer is sustained without leave to amend as to some but not all causes of action.

Your post is insulting to attorneys and shows disrespect to the court system. You are losing your case because you do not know what you are doing, not because the court favors one type of people over another.

Mr. Roach is mostly right, but the rules are more complex and more nuanced than he suggests. Courts sometimes sustain demurrers without leave to amend as to particular causes of action, leaving others in place. Such orders do not end the case as to those parties, so they are not appealable. When a court sustains a demurrer as to an entire complaint without leave to amend, its order usually says the complaint is dismissed. If that happens -- and if the party who brought the complaint is not facing a cross-complaint from the demurring party -- then the order is appealable even though it is not in the form of a judgment. Such orders are sometimes appealable even if they don't *say* the case is dismissed, as long as they result in a dismissal.

Mr. Roach and Mr. Green are both right about your views of courts, HOAs, lawyers, and pro pers. The reason pro pers often lose isn't because courts are biased against them. It's because pro pers are much more likely than lawyers to pursue meritless cases and/or to make serious mistakes that ruin their chances.

Another point: There are deadlines for filing notices of appeal. Demurrers are usually brought quite early in a case. Trials usually happen long after that. You say that two of these three appeals challenge demurrer orders and the third challenges a judgment entered after a party failed to appear for trial. That probably means a long time had already passed since the first two orders. Since you say all three appeals were filed in the same month, the demurrer appeals may well be untimely. I can think of scenarios where they wouldn't be, but this is a problem you should investigate.

Finally, assuming all three appeals are timely, each will require its own record designation unless the Court of Appeal has combined them into a single appeal -- and perhaps even then. You should consult an appellate lawyer about this question, since the rules are too complicated to explain here.

Feel free to contact me directly if you want to discuss your case furter. I am a certified appellate specialist (per the State Bar of California's Board of Legal Specialization) with 20 years of relevant experience. Good luck.