Fulweiler

Fulweiler v. Hog's Back Consolidated Mining Co.

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 648·83 Cal. 126·23 P. 65
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 7, 1890No. 13190California1,204 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hayne, J.

This is an appeal by defendant from orders refusing to set aside a default. The defendant’s first motion to set aside the default was denied. Leave was subsequently granted to renew the motion, and the motion was renewed upon additional affidavits, but was again denied. There was made, also, a motion to change the place of trial, but the counsel for the appellant states in his brief that this motion was abandoned; and the appeal is taken only from the orders refusing to set aside the default.

We think that the default should have been set aside.

The action was commenced at Auburn, in the county of Placer, where the plaintiff’s attorney resided. On January 7, 1889, service was made in Placer County upon the president of the defendant, which had its principal place of business in El Dorado County, where ils officers resided. Within three days after service the defendant retained the firm of Blanchard & Swisler, who had their office in Placerville, El Dorado County, as its attorneys for the defense of the action. They prepared *127 a demurrer to the complaint, and moving papers upon an application to change the venue, and on January 17th, which was the last day for the filing and…

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.