Lacy
Lacy v. Laurentide Finance Corp.
Opinion
Opinion
Pierce, J.
The appeal is by plaintiffs from a summary judgment in favor of defendant. The complaint was in two counts, one pleading false imprisonment, the other was labeled an action “for abuse of process” but misnamed.
Statement of Facts
The records of the Municipal Court of the Sacramento Municipal Court District, County of Sacramento, show that on September 27, 1967, Lauren-tide Finance Corporation (“Laurentide”) brought therein a “Complaint for Money” against plaintiffs herein (“Lacys”). A writ of attachment issued, the salary of Mrs. Lacy was garnisheed on November 2, 1967, and again later. Defendants Lacy were served with summons and complaint in October 1967; a request for default was filed September 18, 1968; no appearance was made by either defendant; and on April 10, 1969, judgment by default was entered in favor of plaintiff for $256 damages, $70 attorney’s fees and $20 costs, a total of $346.
On July 8, 1970, the Lacys filed in the Superior Court of Sacramento County the complaint in the action out of which these proceedings arise. The cause of action, pleading false imprisonment, alleges that on December 2, 1969, plaintiff (spoken of in the singular and referring to…