Hecq

Hecq v. Conner

Good Law
1928 Cal. LEXIS 825·203 Cal. 504·265 P. 180
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 1, 1928Docket No. L.A. 9267.California1,877 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Curtis, J.

This appeal is from an order made after judgment, namely, an order setting aside and vacating a judgment of dismissal previously rendered in this action.

It is first contended by appellants that the notice of motion to vacate and set aside said judgment failed to set forth or state the grounds upon which said motion would be made and, therefore, the order made granting said motion was erroneous and should be reversed by this court. The bill of exceptions upon which this appeal has been brought before this court and which was, of course, prepared by the appellants fails to show thát appellants made any objection to said notice of motion in the court below. On the other hand, it shows that in response to said notice the appellants appeared in said court at the time and place specified therein, filed a counter-affidavit to the affidavit of respondent attached to his said notice of motion, and upon which this motion was based, and otherwise contested the granting of said motion. The first objection, therefore, as shown by the record herein, which appellants have made to said notice of motion is made by them in this court. Section 1010 of the Code of Civil Procedure, requiring a…

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.