Bettencourt

Bettencourt v. Superior Court

Good Law
1917 Cal. App. LEXIS 568·32 Cal. App. 607·163 P. 682
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 26, 1917Civ. No. 2191.California1,168 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Conrey, J.

On March 13, 1916, in an action for divorce wherein petitioner Joe A. Bettencourt was plaintiff and Antonia de Gelloria Bettencourt was defendant, and wherein the default of the defendant had been duly entered, an interlocutory judgment of divorce was duly filed and entered. In August, 1916, the defendant served and filed a notice of motion, together with affidavits and a copy of her proposed answer, stating in the notice that on September 11, 1916, she would move the court to vacate and set aside her default and the said interlocutory judgment, upon the ground that said default and interlocutory judgment of divorce were taken, made, and entered through the mistake, inadvertence, surprise, and excusable neglect of the defendant. The minutes of the superior court for September 11, 1916, show the following proceeding in said action: “The motion to vacate and set aside the interlocutory decree of divorce, coming on regularly to be heard at this time, and H. Scott Jacobs, Esq., attorney for the plaintiff, and J. L. C. Irwin, E'sq.,'attorney for the defendant, being present, it is ordered, by consent of attorneys for both parties, that the same be continued to Saturday, September 16th,…

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.