Legal Opinion

Elms v. Elms

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 11, 1946No. Civ. 15128PublishedCited by 64 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.

The question for decision is whether the trial court abused its discretion in vacating a judgment of annulment under section 473, Code of Civil Procedure, where defendant had filed a general denial, had authorized his counsel to stipulate that the case might be tried in defendant’s absence as a default case, was notified of the trial date one week prior thereto and did not attend the trial but by telegrams discharged his attorney and requested the court to grant a continuance and permit him to file a cross-complaint. Respondent makes no appearance on this appeal.

The parties had celebrated a…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bailey v. TaaffeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  2. Shearman v. JorgensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Brill v. FoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  4. McGuire v. DrewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Hughes v. WrightCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944

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

3Cited by64 opinions

  1. Viles v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Luz v. LopesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Benjamin v. Dalmo Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Coconino Pulp and Paper Company v. MarvinArizona Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Baratti v. BarattiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952

59 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