Legal Opinion
MOGHADDAM v. Bone
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 27, 2006No. G035605PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
O’LEARY, J.
The trial court entered a default judgment in favor of Houman Moghaddam when Kevin Bone and Morgan Bone (the Bones) failed to answer the complaint. The default was later set aside based on the Bones’ unopposed claim of extrinsic fraud/mistake. Subsequently, Moghaddam moved the court to abandon its decision to vacate the default judgment. The trial court revisited the motion to set aside and reaffirmed its previous ruling. Moghaddam challenges: (1) the validity of the court’s original decision to vacate the default judgment, claiming the Bones failed to give him proper…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- In Re Zeth S.California Supreme Court · 2003
- Harth v. Ten EyckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Gibble v. Car-Lene Research, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1998
- Linstead v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Stiles v. WallisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Sakaguchi v. SakaguchiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. H.W.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Department of Industrial Relations v. Davis Moreno Construction, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Johnson v. Ralphs Grocery Co.California Court of Appeal · 2012
- Rodriguez v. HenardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.