California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Maryland Casualty Co. v. Andreini & Co. of Southern CA, 81 Cal.App.4th 1413, 97 Cal.Rptr.2d 752 (Cal. App. 2000):
The use of the words "may petition," together with "shall be filed," suggests that a writ petition might not be the exclusive means of reviewing a good faith settlement determination. "[T]he word 'may' is ordinarily construed as permissive, whereas 'shall' is ordinarily construed as mandatory, particularly when both terms are used in the same statute." (Common Cause v. Board of Supervisors (1989) 49 Cal.3d 432, 443.) While section 877.6(e) seemingly does not foreclose review on a postjudgment appeal, it does make plain that if a party decides to seek prejudgment relief, the writ petition must comply with the statute's 20-day time limitation. In any event, given that section 877.6(e) does not bar postjudgment review on its face, we turn to the statute's legislative history.10
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.