Ritter

Ritter v. Braash

Good Law
11 Cal. App. 258·1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 166·104 P. 592
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 3, 1909Civ. No. 687.California859 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Taggart, J.

Action to cancel promissory note. Default judgment was entered on cross-complaint of defendant praying for judgment on the note. Appeal is by plaintiff from this judgment, from an order of the superior court denying his motion to strike defendant’s answer and cross-complaint from the files, and from an order of the court denying his motion to set aside the default entered on the cross-complaint.

Complaint was filed December 3, 1908, demurrer thereto December 11th, and on December 18, 1908, demurrer was overruled. On December 23, 1908, an answer and cross-complaint separately stated, but bound as one instrument, stated in the transcript to have been “duly verified,” was served on the attorneys for plaintiff, their acceptance of service being as follows: “Received copy of within answer & cross this 23d day of Dec., 1908, Randall & Gaines, attorney for plaintiff,” their residence not being given. On January 18, 1909, personal service of the answer and cross-complaint was made on both plaintiffs in Los Angeles county, and default for failure to answer the cross-complaint was entered by the clerk of the superior court on January 22, 1909. The record also shows a minute entry of such…

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.