Wax

Defendants appeal from an order denying their motion to vacate a judgment by confession. We reverse the order.

Plaintiff and defendant Joseph Infante had a dispute over monies allegedly due from Joseph to plaintiff. They agreed on a settlement of that dispute, which included the execution by Joseph and his wife of a promissory note and of a confession of judgment. The parties then went to a lawyer who had, in the past, represented both plaintiff and the defendants, with a request that he draw the necessary papers, which he did. Defendants having fallen in default under the note, the confession of judgment was filed, accompanied by a certificate from the lawyer, and judgment was entered thereon. Shortly thereafter defendants moved to vacate that judgment. The motion was denied and this appeal followed. We reverse.

After the decision in Isbell v. County of Sonoma (1978) 21 Cal.3d 61 [ 145 Cal.Rptr. 368 , 577 P.2d 188 ], the Legislature amended section 1132 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Subdivision (b) of that section, as so amended, reads as follows:

Plaintiff contends here that the purpose of section 1132 was to make sure that a defendant was properly advised as to…