Brackett

Brackett v. Banegas

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 728·99 Cal. 623·34 P. 344
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 7, 1893No. 19123California1,362 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

The respondent filed his complaint against Manuel Banegas, the appellant, and J. W. Lucas, for the fore *625 closure of a mortgage executed to him by said Manuel, and upon the default of Lucas, and the answer of Banegas, the cause was tried and judgment rendered in favor of the respondent March 9, 1891. Upon this judgment an order of sale was issued March 14th, and the mortgaged premises sold to the plaintiff for the amount of the judgment April 6, 1891, and the order of sale and judgment returned satisfied. On the 13th of April, 1892, upon the ex parte application of the plaintiff in said action, respondent herein, the court "made an order “that all subsequent proceedings herein after the service of summons and the return thereof upon defendants, Manuel Banegas and J. M. Lucas, be and the same are set aside, and said decree opened without prejudice to the rights of the plaintiff in said decree of foreclosure, and that plaintiff be and he is hereby allowed to file an amended and supplemental complaint herein.” Thereafter the plaintiff filed an amended complaint, making Nievas Banegas a party defendant, and a summons was issued thereon and served upon Manuel and Nievas. These two…

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.