Pierce v. Avakian
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Franklin J. Cole, Judge presiding. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This is an action upon a promissory note. The complaint contained all the usual and proper averments and was verified. To the complaint defendant interposed a general demurrer. At the time of the hearing of this demurrer defendant was not present nor represented. This general demurrer to a complaint in all respects legally sufficient, appearing to the trial court to be frivolous and to have been interposed for delay, that court, in accordance with section 472 of the Code of Civil Procedure and its own rules (rule 22, superior court county of Los Angeles) permitted defendant to answer within…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Booth v. HoskinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Bohall v. DillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
3Cited by7 opinions
- Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Production Credit Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. PendergrassCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Greenstone v. Claretian Theological SeminaryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Rottman v. HevenerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Oakland Medical Building Corp. v. AureguyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.