Cyrus v. Haveson
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
THOMPSON, J.
The matter at bench involves cross-appeals from a default judgment. Defendants contend: (1) the trial court erred in denying their motion to be relieved from default on the ground of excusable neglect; (2) the court failed to obtain personal jurisdiction because of defective service of summons; and (3) the complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to support exemplaiy damages. In her cross-appeal, plaintiff contends that the trial court erred when, after referring the assessment of damages to a juiy pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 585, subdivision 2, it reduced…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Unruh v. Truck Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- People v. One 1941 Chevrolet CoupeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Crogan v. MetzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Phillips v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Lynch v. SpilmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Spinks v. Equity Residential Briarwood ApartmentsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Voris v. LampertCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
- Uva v. EvansCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Coury v. TsapisWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1983
- Fifth & Broadway Partnership v. Kimny, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1980
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.