Hartman v. Olvera
49 Cal. 101
Opinion
The defendant not having complied with the terms upon which the default and judgment had been set aside, both the default and judgment remained in force in the same manner as if the order for setting them aside had not been made.
The second application to set aside the default and judgment came too late, it having been made more than five months after the adjournment of the term at which the judgment had been entered.
Order of February 9, 1874, reversed. Remittitur forthwith.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hartman v. Olvera, 49 Cal. 101 (Cal. 1874).
49 Cal. 101 (Hartman v. Olvera) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Jacuzzi v. Jacuzzi Bros., Inc.
243 Cal. App. 2d 1 (California Court of Appeal, 1966)
Ronda v. Ortiz
33 P.R. 214 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1924)
Monllor & Co. v. Hutchison
18 P.R. 860 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1912)
State ex rel. Hickey v. District Court
113 P. 472 (Montana Supreme Court, 1911)
State ex rel. Von Phul v. Harrison
53 Mo. App. 346 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1893)