Jury

Turline, S. A. v. Jury

Good Law
1962 Cal. App. LEXIS 1951·207 Cal. App. 2d 655·24 Cal. Rptr. 625
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 13, 1962Civ. No. 26098California616 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Ford, J.

The appellant, James T. Jury, has appealed from an order denying his motion to vacate and set aside the default and the default judgment entered against him after he *656 had been served with process and had failed to appear and answer the complaint. His default was entered on January 16, 1961. The date of entry of the judgment was April 13, 1961. The notice of motion was filed on September 8, 1961.

In the notice of motion the grounds of the motion were stated to be that “defendant’s failure to answer the Complaint . . . within the time allowed . . . was due to surprise, inadvertance, mistake or excusable neglect on the part of this . . . defendant and his counsel, as more particularly set forth in the affidavit of James T. Jury. ...” The appellant based his position solely upon the provisions of section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 1 But such reliance was misplaced because the default was entered more than six months prior to the time when his notice of motion for relief was filed. The time when the period of six months begins to run is determined by the date of the entry of the default and not by the subsequent date of entry of judgment. (Wyoming Pacific Oil Co. v.…

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.