Barrett v. Graham
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Sixth District. Ejectment against Graham and Heppe for a lot in Sacramento. Both defendants filed demurrers, the latter on the twenty-fourth, and the former on the twenty-sixth of April, 1860. May 7th, Graham in person, in open Court, withdrew his demurrer, and stated that he had no defense, whereupon judgment was entered against him.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Sixth District. Ejectment against Graham and Heppe for a lot in Sacramento. Both defendants filed demurrers, the latter on the twenty-fourth, and the former on the twenty-sixth of April, 1860. May 7th, Graham in person, in open Court, withdrew his demurrer, and stated that he had no defense, whereupon judgment was entered against him. On the same day the Court made an order allowing one Van Glann to file an intervention; and on the twenty-seventh of August, Van Glann filed an answer purporting to he as and for Heppe. August 31st, 1860, demurrer of Heppe overruled, and no…
1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.
—Field, C. J. concurring.
This is an appeal from an order setting aside two judgments obtained by the plaintiffs by default. The order was made upon conflicting affidavits, and we cannot undertake to say that an error has been committed. The grounds set forth in the affidavit on behalf of the defendants are sufficient to sustain the action of the Court.
Order affirmed.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bailey v. TaaffeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Fox v. MinorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Justice v. OttCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Kinkead v. MoriartySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912