Legal Opinion
Weinberger v. Manning
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 17, 1942No. Civ. 13404PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.
The question for determination in this case is whether it is an abuse of discretion on the part of a trial judge to set aside a default judgment and recall an execution after the lapse of 82 days from service of the summons and complaint when no excusable neglect on the part of defendant is shown.
In order fairly to appraise the conduct of defendant, we first present a succinct resume of the undisputed occurrences commencing with the filing of the action by plaintiff.
April 22, 1941: action for damages for eviction and for conversion filed.
May 1: summons and complaint served. Defendant is…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Brill v. FoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Bruskey v. BruskeyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Coleman v. RankinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Garroway v. JenningsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Redding Gold & Copper Mining Co. v. National Surety Co.California Court of Appeal · 1912
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Yarbrough v. YarbroughCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Vartanian v. CrollCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Kendall v. BarkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Ney v. HarrisonUtah Supreme Court · 1956
- Fidelity Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Glendale v. LongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.