Hearn

Hearn v. Howard

Bad Law
177 Cal. App. 4th 1193·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 1564·99 Cal. Rptr. 3d 642
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 1, 2009B208782California6,191 words

Opinion

Opinion

Todd, J.

Defendant and appellant Lisa M. Howard appeals following the denial of her motion to vacate entry of default and a default judgment against her on the complaint filed by plaintiffs and respondents Barbara Hearn and Thierry Didelot (plaintiffs). She contends the trial court abused its discretion by determining that she was properly served by substituted service and declining to find that entry of default was the result of mistake, surprise, inadvertence or excusable neglect. Finding no basis to conclude the trial court abused its discretion, we affirm, though we modify the judgment to omit $15,000 in attorney fees because that amount was not specified in the complaint.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On May 14, 2007, plaintiffs filed a complaint for damages against appellant, Sunitha Anjilvel and Stewart Richlin, alleging a claim for legal malpractice arising from their negligent representation of plaintiffs in a prior action which precluded plaintiffs from collecting a judgment and setting aside a fraudulent conveyance.

The following day, May 15, 2007, plaintiffs’ counsel sent a notice and acknowledgement of receipt to all three defendants which enclosed the summons…

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.