Knox v. Superior Court

Good Law
100 Cal. App. 452·1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 272·280 P. 375
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 27, 1929Docket No. 6668.California1,049 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Houser, J.

So far as this proceeding is concerned, the essential facts are that in an action instituted by petitioner Knox in the Superior Court of the County of Riverside (No. 17914 of the files of said court) against one Wyman and Title Guarantee and Trust Company, a corporation, each of said defendants failed to answer the complaint therein, and the default of each of them was regularly taken and judgment entered. About five months later, under the provisions of section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Title Guarantee and Trust Company, a corporation, as trustee, and one Aamoth, individually (the latter of whom claiming as assignee of the rights of defendant Wyman in the subject matter of the action), served the plaintiff in said action with a notice that on a specified date, which was more than six months after the default in the action had been taken, they would move the trial court to vacate the default and the judgment entered in the action. On stipulation of the parties, several continuances of the hearing of the motion were ordered by the trial court; but the motion was finally granted. Thereupon, as against Title Guarantee and Trust Company, a corporation, as trustee, 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.