Jones

Jones v. Justice's Court

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 584·97 Cal. 523·32 P. 575
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 13, 1893No. 19027California1,281 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The petitioner herein applied to the court below for a writ of review, and judgment was entered in her favor, directing the appellant to vacate and set aside a judgment entered in the justice’s court of Los Angeles City on the fourth day of June, 1891, in favor of one Brosseau, and against petitioner, Ellen Jones. The ground upon which the petitioner herein asked for the writ was, that neither she nor her attorney ever had *524 any notice that the case pending in the justice’s court had been set for trial, and the learned judge of the court below sustained the petitioner’s contention in that regard, and granted the writ prayed for.

Section 850 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that “ when all the parties served with process shall have appeared, or some of them have appeared, and the remaining defendants have made default, the justice must fix a day for the trial of said cause, and notify the plaintiff and the defendants who have appeared thereof.” Appellant contends that the justice having acquired jurisdiction, the failure to notify the defendant of the time fixed for trial was mere error which could have been corrected only upon appeal. We do not think the contention 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.