Legal Opinion
Plotitsa v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 14, 1983No. Civ. 66372PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WOODS, P. J.
By petition for mandate, petitioners, Felix Plotitsa and Nick Lenderman, in a personal injury action seek review of a trial court order denying their motion under section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside a default entered against them. Petitioners contend that the unique pleading requirement created by sections 425.10 and 425.11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1 requires a personal injury plaintiff to personally serve a defendant who has not appeared after valid service of complaint and summons, with a “statement of damages” and to defer entry of default until…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- J. R. Norton Co. v. Agricultural Labor Relations BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Mahdavi v. Fair Employment Practice Com.California Court of Appeal · 1977
- Engebretson & Co. v. HarrisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- Petty v. Manpower, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1979
- Stevenson v. TurnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Arnett v. Dal CieloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- Beeman v. BurlingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Heidary v. YadollahiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Schwab v. Rondel Homes, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1991
- Texas Commerce Bank v. GaramendiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.