Legal Opinion

Fassio v. Woolfrey

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 9, 1918No. Civ. No. 2437PublishedCited by 1 opinion

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtKerrigan, J.

This is an appeal from the judgment taken upon the judgment-roll alone.

The appellant, Esther Nathan, is one of the defendants in the action.. Her husband is also joined as a defendant under the name of John Doe Nathan, “for the reason,” as stated in the complaint, “that he is the husband of Esther Nathan.” A judgment by default was entered against her. Her husband was never served with summons.

It is clear that under the provisions of section 370 of the Code of Civil Procedure it is not sufficient to merely name the husband as a party defendant in an action against his wife, but he must also…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McDonald v. PorshCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. George v. StenslandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920

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

Powered by the Exa API