Davis-Heller-Pearce Co. v. Ramont
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.
This appeal is from an order denying the motion of defendant B. J. Biaggi, substituted as defendant for George Biaggi, “to quash the service of summons” on the latter and “to set aside and vacate the default and judgment against” him. The court ordered service of summons by publication upon George Biaggi. In lieu of such publication, he was personally served with a copy of the summons and complaint in’ the state of Arizona, which service, under the provisions of section 413 of the Code of Civil Procedure, “is equivalent to publication and deposit in the post-office.” The only question…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Rue v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Town of Santa Monica v. GuidingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Ligare v. California Southern RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Gardner v. SteadmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Santa Cruz v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- Osborn v. City of WhittierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Senior Loiza Corporation v. Vento Development CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
- City of Salinas v. Luke Kow LeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Hoffman v. City of Palm SpringsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.