Merriman

Merriman v. Walton

Good Law
105 Cal. 403·1895 Cal. LEXIS 671·38 P. 1108
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 3, 1895No. 15519California921 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

The defendant, Walton, commenced an action against the plaintiff and another in a justice’s court, and, after the defendants therein had answered the complaint, the justice set the case for trial on the 28tli of February, but on the morning of that day it was agreed between the attorneys for the respective parties that the trial should be postponed, and that the cause should be transferred to another township. On the next day the attorneys for the plaintiff herein received a letter from the justice, purporting to have been written the previous day, in which he stated that the case was to be transferred to another township, and thereupon the attorneys for Walton agreed to take such steps as would be necessary to effect the transfer. Instead of so doing, however, they had on the previous day, without any knowledge on the part of the plaintiff herein, or of his attorneys, appeared before the justice and caused judgment by default to be entered by the justice against the defendants therein for the full amount asked for in the complaint. At the time that the justice wrote the above letter, and at the time of the *407 agreement on the part of Walton’s attorneys to effect the transfer to…

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.