Legal Opinion
Rodriguez v. Nam Min Cho
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 7, 2015No. B256985PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FLIER, J.
Nam Min Cho appeals from an order denying his motion to set aside the default judgment in this action. Cho raises two main contentions, one relating to purportedly improper or fraudulent service of the summons and complaint, and the second relating to the amount of damages awarded in the default judgment. We find the first contention lacks merit but the second does not. We hold the default judgment is void because it exceeded the amount of damages stated in the complaint. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions.
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. Allegations of Complaint
Dulce…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 1980
- Greenup v. RodmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
- Barton v. New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1996
- Gourley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- Electronic Funds Solutions v. MurphyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Pittman v. Beck Park Apartments Ltd., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Airs Aromatics, LLC v. CBL Data Recovery Techs., Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Dhawan v. BiringCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Behm v. Clear View TechnologiesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Marteney v. Elementis Chems. Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.