Saum

Saum v. Reppert

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 590·35 Cal. App. 4th 1766·42 Cal. Rptr. 2d 454·95 Daily Journal DAR 8446·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4948
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 27, 1995C019017California2,674 words

Opinion

Opinion

Blease, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to set aside a default judgment in an action for declaratory and injunctive relief regarding Lisle Steven Saum’s claimed right-of-way easements over property owned by Leroy and Sally Reppert.

The Repperts answered the Saum complaint and filed a cross-complaint. Saum failed to answer the cross-complaint and his default was entered. He contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to set aside the default judgment. He argues that the judgment is based on a default that is void because it was taken to a cross-complaint that replicates allegations of the answer to Saum’s complaint which he is deemed to have denied.

In the published part of the opinion we conclude that Saum’s argument is based upon outmoded case law which was addressed to matter in the nature of a counterclaim, a pleading which since has been abolished. However, in the unpublished portion of the opinion we conclude that the judgment is invalid insofar as it awards damages that were not specified in the cross-complaint and we will modify the judgment to delete the damages and affirm the order denying the motion to set aside the judgment.

Facts and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.