Carter

Carter v. Paige

Good Law
1889 Cal. LEXIS 1085·3 Cal. Unrep. 64·20 P. 729
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 7, 1889No. 12,637California566 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

Plaintiff had judgment in the court below. Defendant appeals from the judgment upon the judgment-roll alone.

The judgment-roll shows that, after defendant had answered the original complaint, an amended complaint was filed on the sixth day of June, 1887. There was no answer to the amended complaint. On July 23d—about forty-seven days after the filing of the amended complaint—the court rendered judgment for plaintiff. This judgment commences as follows: “In this action the defendant, Timothy Paige, having been regularly served with process, and having failed to appear and answer to the plaintiff’s amended complaint filed herein on June 6, 1887, and served on defendant’s counsel on June 2, 1887, and the legal time for answering or demurring to said amended complaint having expired, and no answer or demurrer having been filed to said amended complaint, the *65 default of said defendant, Timothy Paige, in the premises, was duly entered herein according to law on the fifteenth day of July, 1887, upon demand of the plaintiff’s attorney in writing filed herein.” It then recites that plaintiff introduced evidence upon the matters alleged in the amended complaint; finds from the evidence…

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.