Mercantile Banking Co. v. Hernandez

117 Cal. App. 510
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedOctober 16, 1931
DocketCiv. No. 873
StatusPublished

This text of 117 Cal. App. 510 (Mercantile Banking Co. v. Hernandez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mercantile Banking Co. v. Hernandez, 117 Cal. App. 510 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931).

Opinion

JENNINGS, J.

The appeal . herein is from an order vacating and setting aside the default of the defendant [511]*511entered by the clerk—an order made before the entry of any judgment "in the action. 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 Pac. 821]; Rauer’s Law etc. Co. v. Standley, 3 Cal. App. 44 [84 Pac. 214] ; Rose v. Lelande, 17 Cal. App. 308 [119 Pac. 532]; LaPique v. Plummer, 24 Cal. App. 685 [142 Pac. 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

Related

Rauer's Law & Collection Co. v. Standley
84 P. 214 (California Court of Appeal, 1906)
Rose v. Lelande
119 P. 532 (California Court of Appeal, 1911)
Lapique v. Plummer
142 P. 107 (California Court of Appeal, 1914)
Savage v. Smith
97 P. 821 (California Supreme Court, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
117 Cal. App. 510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mercantile-banking-co-v-hernandez-calctapp-1931.