Bryan v. Stidger
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Tenth District. Plaintiffs having obtained judgment against defendants, in 1852, applied ex parte, in 1860, to the Court for an execution, which was granted. Defendant appeals from the order granting plaintiffs leave to issue execution.
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
Field, C. J. and Cope, J. concurring.
*271The only question in this case is, whether notice be necessary before an order can be made under the two hundred and fourteenth section of the Practice Act. That section provides for the issuance of an execution in eases of judgment rendered more than five years before the application. We think that no notice is necessary in such cases. The statute does not require it in terms; and the fact that the Act of 1850 required notice, and this provision now in force omits this requirement, is significant to show that the Legislature did not design to continue it.…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Parker v. ParkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Doehla v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- National Bank of California v. Los Angeles Iron & Steel Co.California Court of Appeal · 1906
- Bredfield v. HannonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Goble v. Appellate Department of Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.