McNeely v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandamus originally made to the District Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District to compel the Superior Court to proceed with the trial of an action. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
WORKS, J., pro tem.
This proceeding concerns a certain action in which the petitioner, as plaintiff, sued one Connell and one Hill for damages as joint tort-feasors. Hill appeared in the action and made answer to the complaint, but the default of Connell was taken; whereupon the petitioner elected to proceed against the latter under the default and judgment in the sum of one thousand five hundred dollars was entered against him. Connell then came forward and presented a motion to set aside the default and the motion was granted. The petitioner appealed from the order thus made and the appeal…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Marriott v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Cole v. Roebling Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- McCool v. MahoneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ellsworth v. United States Metals Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1952
- Proper v. Sutter Drainage DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Grieve v. HuberWyoming Supreme Court · 1928
- Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. EbertSupreme Court of Florida · 1931
- Corley v. FrenchSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.