Legal Opinion

Cyrus v. Haveson

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 27, 1976No. Civ. 47896PublishedCited by 18 opinions

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

  1. Unruh v. Truck Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. People v. One 1941 Chevrolet CoupeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Crogan v. MetzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Phillips v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Lynch v. SpilmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Spinks v. Equity Residential Briarwood ApartmentsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  2. Voris v. LampertCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
  3. Uva v. EvansCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  4. Coury v. TsapisWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Fifth & Broadway Partnership v. Kimny, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1980

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API