Brooks

Brooks v. White

Good Law
1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 82·22 Cal. App. 719·136 P. 500
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 20, 1913Civ. No. 1351.California913 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Allen, J.

An action to determine conflicting claims to real property, as authorized by section 738 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was instituted by plaintiff against defendants. Defendant Martha S. White filed an answer in due time denying the averments of the complaint, alleging ownership and possession of the premises involved, and asking for affirmative relief in that she be adjudged the owner of the premises and that plaintiff be enjoined from asserting any claim .thereto. At the same time she filed a pleading denominated a cross-complaint, alleging ownership and possession of the premises described in the complaint precisely as in the answer, and praying for the same affirmative relief as in the answer demanded. Service of this cross-complaint was admitted by attorneys, and plaintiff not answering the same within ten days, the clerk entered plaintiff’s default, and the court, on December 5, 1910, rendered a judgment and decree as prayed for in the cross-complaint, which judgment was on the same day entered in the judgment book. On December 12th plaintiff gave notice of an intention to move for an order vacating the judgment and default because of the want of authority of the clerk to…

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.