Bloodgood

Hammond Lumber Co. v. Bloodgood

Caution
101 Cal. App. 561·281 P. 1101
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 29, 1929Docket No. 19.California1,159 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Marks, J.

On April 16, 1927, appellant filed its action against defendants, seeking to foreclose a materialman’s lien. Respondent was named as contractor and personal judgment was sought against him. The summons is not in the record, but respondent admits personal service in the county of Riverside. On October 21, 1927, the default of respondent was entered, and on December 3, 1927, a default judgment was rendered and entered against him. No judgment was taken foreclosing the lien. On December 8, 1927, respondent served and filed his notice of motion to set aside the judgment, on the grounds of mistake, inadvertence and excusable neglect. Attached to the notice of motion were respondent’s affidavit and his verified answer. At the time the motion was argued counsel for both appellant and respondent were present and submitted additional affidavits to the trial court. On January 19, 1928, the court below granted respondent’s motion, using the following language in so doing: “It is ordered that the motion of defendant, D. W. Lewis, and the proceedings subsequent be and the same is hereby granted and such default is hereby set aside and all proceedings subsequent thereto.”

The notice of motion…

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.