Legal Opinion

Isbell v. County of Sonoma

California Supreme Court

Decided April 24, 1978No. S.F. 23604PublishedCited by 61 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

TOBRINER, J.

Under the due process clause of the federal Constitution, a court may enter judgment against a defendant only if the record shows that either (a) the defendant has received notice and an opportunity to be heard, or (b) the defendant has voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waived his constitutional rights. The California confession of judgment statutes (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1132-1134), however, direct the court clerk in nonconsumer cases to enter judgment on the basis of the signed confession without notice and hearing. We shall explain that a signed confession of…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  4. Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974

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

3Cited by61 opinions

  1. Newman v. Emerson Radio Corp.California Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Peterson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission v. Washington National ArenaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
  4. Fiore v. Oakwood Plaza Shopping Center, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. Md.-Nat'l Cap. P. & P. v. Wash. Nat'l ArenaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978

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

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

Powered by the Exa API