Grewell v. Henderson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, Santa Clara County. The facts material to the points decided, appear in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the CourtHeydenfeldt, J.
Murray, C. J., concurred.
The only error necessary to be considered, is the first one assigned, viz: that the judgment was rendered before the expiration of the time allowed by law for the defendant to answer.
There was an affidavit of the non-residence of the defendant, and an *466order of publication for three months. Almost immediately after the time for publication ceased, the judgment was rendered.
This was wrong, according to the plain interpretation of the statute. See Practice Act, §§ 25, 30, 31. The Act allows a party ten days after the service of the summons to file his answer, if served…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Whealton v. WhealtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- Dallam County Bank v. BurnsideNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1926
- Bowen v. HarperIdaho Supreme Court · 1899
- Forsyth v. ChambersNevada Supreme Court · 1908
- Conley v. MorrisSupreme Court of Colorado · 1882
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.