Potter v. City of Compton
59 P.2d 540, 15 Cal. App. 2d 238
Opinion
Appellants challenge the jurisdiction of the trial court to grant relief from the default of respondent, resulting from his inadvertent failure to file his memorandum of costs within the statutory time after notice of entry of judgment. Upon authority of Soda v. Marriott, 130 Cal. App. 589 [20 Pac. (2d) 758], we hold that the court had jurisdiction to make the order appealed from, and it is therefore affirmed.
Houser, P. J., and Doran, J., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Potter v. City of Compton, 59 P.2d 540, 15 Cal. App. 2d 238 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936).
59 P.2d 540 (Potter v. City of Compton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Spellens v. Spellens
317 P.2d 613 (California Supreme Court, 1957)
Lane v. Pacific Greyhound Lines
182 P.2d 178 (California Supreme Court, 1947)