People v. Mullan
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Sau Bernardino County refusing to set aside a judgment. The facts are stated in the head-note and the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.
The motion to set aside the judgment is a direct and not collateral attack.
The moving party offered to show that there was no service of summons on Mullan. The service purported to be by publication, and the specific offer was to show that no affidavit for publication of summons was ever made, and that there was no order made authorizing such publication. On objection by plaintiff the offer was rejected, and an exception was reserved.
The judgment, if rendered as offered to be shown, was void. If Mullan was the mover, such ruling would undoubtedly be error. He would be entitled to show that…
2Cited by30 opinions
- People v. GreeneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Reinhart v. LugoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- People v. HarrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Crescent Canal Co. v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Trumpler v. TrumplerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.