Legal Opinion

Lint v. Chisholm

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 17, 1981No. Civ. 22764Published

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WORK, J.

C. Chisholm appeals an order denying his motion to vacate a default judgment (Code Civ. Proc., § 473 1 )- He asserts multiple grounds: surprise, excusable neglect, absent his stipulation the temporary judge lacked authority to enter the default judgment, variance between the judgment and minute order, variance between the relief granted and that prayed for, and error in the court’s failure to dispose of his cross-complaint or calculate the factors argued in it. Chisholm, a self-represented lawyer, also attacks the denial of his motion for summary judgment.

Background

In August…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Stationers Corp. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Tammen v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Weitz v. YankoskyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Rooney v. Vermont Investment Corp.California Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Sarracino v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

20 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