Nickerson v. California Raisin Co.

California Supreme Court

Nickerson v. California Raisin Co.

61 Cal. 268, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 594

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedAugust 22, 1882

DocketNo. 7,910

StatusPublished

Cited by25 cases

This text of 61 Cal. 268 (Nickerson v. California Raisin Co.) 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

Nickerson v. California Raisin Co., 61 Cal. 268, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 594 (Cal. 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

Ross, J.:

To have justified the Court below in setting aside the default, an affidavit of merits on the part of the defendant was essential. Such affidavit must show that the defendant has fully and fairly stated the facts of the case to his counsel, before the advice of the latter could amount to a prima facie showing of merits on defendant’s behalf. It is obvious that a statement, such as is found in the affidavit in the present case, that, defendant has fully and fairly stated the said defendant’s defense in this action” to his counsel, does not answer [269]*269the requirement. It might be that the defense relied on was a purely technical one, that did not touch the merits of the controversy. The expression used in the affidavit is not the equivalent of a statement that the defendant had fully and fairly stated to his counsel all the facts in the case.

Judgment and order affirmed.

Thoenton, Shabpstein, and McKinstry, JJ., concurred.

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

Ross, J.:

To have justified the Court below in setting aside the default, an affidavit of merits on the part of the defendant was essential. Such affidavit must show that the defendant has fully and fairly stated the facts of the case to his counsel, before the advice of the latter could amount to a prima facie showing of merits on defendant’s behalf. It is obvious that a statement, such as is found in the affidavit in the present case, that, defendant has fully and fairly stated the said defendant’s defense in this action” to his counsel, does not answer [269]*269the requirement. It might be that the defense relied on was a purely technical one, that did not touch the merits of the controversy. The expression used in the affidavit is not the equivalent of a statement that the defendant had fully and fairly stated to his counsel all the facts in the case.

Judgment and order affirmed.

Thoenton, Shabpstein, and McKinstry, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 Cal. 268, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nickerson-v-california-raisin-co-cal-1882.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack