Pico v. Carillo
California Supreme Court
Pico v. Carillo, 7 Cal. 30 (Cal. 1857)
Murray
Pico v. Carillo
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court—Terry, J., concurring.
The order of the Court below, setting aside a default, and judgment entered during vacation, was regular and correct, inasmuch as there had been no service of summons upon the defendants.
This proceeding is expressly warranted by the sixty-eighth Section of the Practice Act, and, in a case where there has been no service whatever, it is not necessary to file a bill in chancery to vacate the judgment; but it may be set aside or re-opened, on motion, within the time allowed by law.
Although the “ want of proper legal service ” was the ground of the defendants’ motion in the Court below, the record shows that there was, in fact, no service whatever.
•Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- PICO v. CARILLO
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- An order of Court, setting aside a default and judgment entered during vacation, is regular and correct, where there has been no service of summons upon the defendants. This proceeding is expressly authorized by the sixty-eighth section of the Practice Act, and it is not necessary to file a bill in chancery to vacate the judgment.