Legal Opinion
Rogalski v. Nabers Cadillac
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 10, 1992No. G011755PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WALLIN, J.
Nabers Cadillac and Richard Nabers (collectively Nabers unless otherwise indicated) appeal a default judgment entered against them in favor of Robert Rogalski for $500,000 in compensatory damages and $58,299.90 in attorney fees and costs. Nabers contends the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to set aside their defaults. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473.) We agree and reverse.
Rogalski filed a complaint against Nabers and its employee Sam Snead, alleging age discrimination in violation of Government Code section 12941, breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Daley v. County of ButteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Carroll v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1982
- Orange Empire National Bank v. KirkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Don v. CruzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Mink v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Lang v. HochmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Cisneros v. VueveCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Metropolitan Service Corp. v. Casa De Palms, Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 1995
- Todd v. Thrifty Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1995
- Fasuyi v. Permatex, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2008
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.