Campbell v. Adams
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The plaintiff, on the 17th of April, 1868, commenced an action against Adams and others to recover possession of lands in the city and county of San Francisco.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The plaintiff, on the 17th of April, 1868, commenced an action against Adams and others to recover possession of lands in the city and county of San Francisco. There were a large number of defendants named in the complaint, and there was an allegation that the real names of defendants John Doe and Bichard Boe and others, were unknown to the plaintiff, and that he, therefore, sued them by fictitious names. January 27, 1869, J. B. Lewis answered. His answer commenced thus: “J. B. Lewis, summoned under…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Crockett, J.:
The motion by Lewis to vacate and set aside the writ of restitution is founded on the assumption that not having been named as a defendant in the action his voluntary appearance was unauthorized and void, and that the judgment against him is a nullity, notwithstanding his appearance. McKinlay v. Tuttle (42 Cal. 571) is relied upon as supporting this proposition. But that was a direct appeal from the judgment, while in this case it is sought to attack the judgment collaterally. In his answer, Lewis admits that he was served with the summons as one of the defendants…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Crouch v. H. L. Miller & Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- Johnston v. S.F. Savings UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Tyrrell v. BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- McGinn v. ReesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
- Ex Parte Fil KiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.