Mercantile Banking Co. v. Hernandez

4 P.2d 277, 117 Cal. App. 510, 1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 524
California Court of Appeal·Decided October 16, 1931·No. Docket No. 873.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The appeal herein is from an order vacating and setting aside the default of the defendant *Page 511 entered by the clerk — an order made before the entry of any judgment in the action. [1] Such an order, where it appears that no judgment has been entered upon the default, is not the subject of a separate appeal. It is in no sense an order made after judgment and is not one of the interlocutory orders enumerated in section 963 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Savage v. Smith, 154 Cal. 325 [97 P. 821]; Rauer's Lawetc. Co. v. Standley, 3 Cal.App. 44 [84 P. 214]; Rose v.Lelande, 17 Cal.App. 308 [119 P. 532]; LaPique v.Plummer, 24 Cal.App. 685 [142 P. 107].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Barnard, P.J., and Marks, J., concurred.

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

Mercantile Banking Co. v. Hernandez, 4 P.2d 277, 117 Cal. App. 510, 1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 524 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931).

4 P.2d 277 (Mercantile Banking Co. v. Hernandez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Benders v. Stratton
Montana Supreme Court, 1982
Davenport Bank & Trust Co. v. City of Davenport
318 N.W.2d 451 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1982)