Peterson

Peterson v. Holder

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 904·45 Cal. App. 278·187 P. 99
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 24, 1919Civ. No. 3063.California1,021 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wood, J.

This is an appeal from two orders made after judgment, the first bearing date June 21, 1919, vacating an order denying a motion to set aside the judgment by default, and the second one dated July 2, 1919, setting aside such judgment.

After the judgment was rendered, the defendants made a motion to set it aside. The motion was taken under advisement and thereafter, in the absence of the parties, an order was entered denying the motion. It does not appear whether defendants’ attorney knew of this order. Two days later he served notice that on June 21st he would move “for permission to make further argument on the motion to set aside the default. ’ ’ Upon the last-named date the order was entered vacating the order denying the motion to set aside the judgment, a stay of execution for ten days was granted, and the motion to set aside the judgment submitted on briefs. The record presented here shows that, at the hearing had on June 21st, the law clerk of Mr. McKevitt (defendants’ counsel) was sworn, and testified to the merits of the original motion to set aside the default, without any objection from plaintiff’s counsel, who fully cross-examined him. He suggested that a stay of…

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.