Legal Opinion
Vandermoon v. Sanwong
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 28, 2006No. C050789PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BLEASE, Acting P. J.
Relying on Code of Civil Procedure section 473, 1 defendants Suwich Sanwong and Clara Joyce Sanwong (hereafter collectively defendants) moved to set aside a judgment entered against them following a trial conducted in their absence on the ground that their attorney failed to inform them of the trial date.
The trial court concluded that defendants were not entitled to either discretionary or mandatory relief under section 473, subdivision (b) (hereafter section 473(b)) because the motion was not made within a reasonable time, and the judgment was neither a “default”…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Yeap v. LeakeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- English v. Ikon Business Solutions, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Avila v. ChuaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
3Cited by8 opinions
- Matera v. McLeodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Huh v. WangCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Gee v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2016
- Urban Wildlands Group, Inc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- HUH v. WangCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.