Eggers

Eggers v. Krueger

Good Law
150 C.C.A. 114·236 F. 852·1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 2347
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 9, 1916No. 2681California2,623 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Hunt, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1] We believe that under the circumstances set forth in the above statement the bill is without equity, in that it shows that there was a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law in the courts of the state in which the judgment entered July 11, 1914, was rendered. If we assume for the present purposes of the case that the judgment in ejectment entered against Krueger was obtained by the fraud of plaintiff’s guardian ad litem and the adverse party, it still appears that the plaintiff herein had ample remedy; availed of by motion to set aside the judgment in the court where it was given. Section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure of California provides that the court, upon such terms as may be just, may relieve a party or his legal representative from a judgment, order, or other proceeding taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, provided application therefor be made within a reasonable time, but in no case exceeding six months after such judgment, order, or proceeding has been taken. It is plain from the record that this plaintiff knew of the judgment in favor of Sophie Suter against himself…

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.