Young

City of Los Angeles v. Young

Good Law
118 Cal. 295·1897 Cal. LEXIS 762·50 P. 534
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 15, 1897L. A. No. 313California1,142 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hensnaw, J.

This is an. appeal from the judgment of tte superior court upon a writ of review vacating and annulling a judgment rendered in a justice’s court.

One McCombs in the justice’s court of the township of Los Angeles had instituted a suit against the city of Los Angeles and C. Compton. The defendants appeared in said action by their attorney W. E. Dunn, and interposed demurrers to the complaint. Thereafter the justice of the peace heard and passed upon the demurrers, overruled them, and granted defendants two daj's’ time in which to answer. Defendants failed to answer, and judgment by default was entered for plaintiff. The statutory period of thirty days during which an appeal could have been taken to the superior court passed, and afterward the defendants in that action obtained from the superior court of the county a writ of review. After hearing upon this writ the superior court annulled the judgment of the justice’s court, and this appeal followed.

The contention of petitioners in the superior court was that neither they nor their attorney had been served with notice of the time set for the trial; that service of such notice upon them is, under section 850 of the Code of Civil…

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.