Cummings v. Cummings

Good Law
1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 662·97 Cal. App. 144·275 P. 245
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 21, 1929Docket No. 6117.California2,727 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Crail, J.

The first cause of action set up in the complaint is one to recover on a judgment of the supreme court of the state of New York granting to the wife $65 per week for the support of herself and her two children. And appellant sets out four errors in regard thereto which he claims entitle him to a reversal.

It is first contended that “plaintiff’s complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, as all material allegations of the complaint are based upon information and belief and further that paragraphs IX and X of the first cause of action of the complaint are not sufficient allegations of the judgment and entry thereof.” A more direct statement of appellant’s contention would be that plaintiff may not allege upon information and belief facts known to her or which are ascertainable from an inspection of the public records of New York. The complaint was verified by the attorney for plaintiff for the reason that the plaintiff was absent from the county where the attorney had his office (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 446), and the allegations were properly based upon information and belief. (Brown v. Sandell, 79 Cal. App. 313 [ 249 Pac. 209 ].) Also it must be…

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.