Wheat

Wheat v. McNeill

Good Law
111 Cal. App. 72·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 1064·295 P. 102
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 12, 1931Docket No. 4228.California926 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Plaintiff prosecutes this appeal from a judgment entered after order sustaining without leave to amend a general and special demurrer to the plaintiff’s second amended complaint. The action was brought to have set aside and vacated a judgment theretofore recov cred by the respondent against the plaintiff in the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the County of Los Angeles, wherein the respondent D. A. McNeill was plaintiff and the appellant Carl 0. Wheat was defendant.

The record before us shows the following:

As to the mistake, inadvertence, etc., alleged in the complaint, and the fraud in relation thereto, the following excerpt from the complaint may foe recited as a complete answer to any grounds for relief: The complaint uses the following language: “That the plaintiff was at such time (referring to the service of summons), of the opinion and belief that such summons and complaint, in order to be legal, had to be served upon him by a sheriff or an officer of the law; that at such time the plaintiff was not of the opinion and belief that he had been actually and legally served with a copy of the summons and complaint in said action, or in said action at all;…

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.