Voelker v. Golden Curry Con. Mining Co.
This text of 107 P. 414 (Voelker v. Golden Curry Con. Mining Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
Appeal from an order setting aside a judgment entered upon the default of plaintiff in failing to file an amended complaint within the time allowed therefor after defendant’s demurrer to the original complaint had been sustained.
As has been often said by this court, an application to set aside a default is addressed to the discretion of the district court, and its action thereon will not be revised by this court unless it is [467]*467manifest that its discretion has been abused.' We have examined the showing in support of the motion, and cannot say that the district court abused the discretion lodged in it by the statute. (Revised Codes, sec. 6589.) The default was entered through a mistake of counsel as to the date when the amended pleading was to be filed. His affidavit filed in support of the motion justifies the conclusion that his mistake was excusable. (Mantle v. Largey, 17 Mont. 479, 43 Pac. 633; Pengelly v. Peeler, 39 Mont. 26, 101 Pac. 147.)
The order is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
107 P. 414, 40 Mont. 466, 1910 Mont. LEXIS 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/voelker-v-golden-curry-con-mining-co-mont-1910.