Elliott v. Shaw

16 Cal. 377
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1860
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 16 Cal. 377 (Elliott v. Shaw) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Elliott v. Shaw, 16 Cal. 377 (Cal. 1860).

Opinion

Field, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Baldwin, J. and Cope, J. concurring.

Judgment in this case was entered by default, and the motion to open the same was denied. The excuse proffered by the defendant, in the affidavit upon which the motion was made, for his failure to plead —that he was under the impression, when he retained counsel in the case, that the time to answer had not expired; that he did not recollect the precise day upon which the summons and complaint were served; and that he was quite ill at the time, and did not as carefully [378]*378note the time as he otherwise would have done—was entirely insufficient. It does not appear that Ms illness prevented Mm from attending to Ms business, or that it continued beyond the day. There is hardly a case where judgment of default has been entered, in wliich grounds equally forcible for opening the same might not be presented.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Berendsen v. Babdaty
216 P. 385 (California Court of Appeal, 1923)
Jensen v. Barbour
31 P. 592 (Montana Supreme Court, 1892)
Horton v. New Pass Gold & Silver Mining Co.
27 P. 376 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1891)
Whiteside v. Logan
7 Mont. 373 (Montana Supreme Court, 1888)
People v. Rains
23 Cal. 127 (California Supreme Court, 1863)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16 Cal. 377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elliott-v-shaw-cal-1860.