Legal Opinion

Puryear v. Stanley

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 19, 1985No. Civ. 24773PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PUGLIA, P. J.

Defendant Mark Stanley appeals from an order denying his motion to set aside a default and default judgment. The motion was noticed within six months of entry of default but was defective in that it was unaccompanied by a proposed answer or other responsive pleading as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 473. The single issue on appeal is whether that defect may be cured after the six-month period has expired within which such motions must be brought. We hold that it may not.

On August 19, 1981, plaintiff filed a verified complaint alleging that defendant, a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Lynch v. SpilmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Beard v. BeardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  3. County of Los Angeles v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Roseborough v. CampbellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. Carver v. PlattCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Huh v. WangCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  2. HUH v. WangCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  3. Job v. FarringtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API