In re Estate of O'Gorman

Good Law
4 Coffey 354
Superior Court of California, County of San FranciscoNovember 15, 1906No. 2007California319 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Cofeet, J.

The proponent moves to require the contestants to make their statement of contest and opposition on file herein more definite and certain, by setting out their several grounds of contest and opposition separately.

The motion is based upon section 427 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which reads:

This motion is sought' to be supported upon the authority of City Carpet Works v. Jones, 102 Cal. 510 , 36 Pac. 841 , which says that the remedy, in the given case, is “not by a demurrer, but by a motion to make the pleading more definite and certain by separating and distinctly stating the different causes of action, ’ ’ and in aid of this conclusion is cited Pomeroy’s Code Remedies, star section 447. The learned commissioner who wrote this opinion stopped short of a full quotation. The entire section in Pomeroy reads:

The dictum of Pomeroy is dependent upon a section of the New .York Code of Civil Procedure, which is not incorporated in our code.

The New York section 546, New York Code of Civil Procedure, reads:

The substance of this section is reproduced in our seventh subdivision of grounds of demurrer, section 430 of the Code of Civil Procedure, “that the complaint is ambiguous,…

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.