Opinion

Burt v. Scrantom

  • 1 Cal. 416
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Apr 15, 1851
Status
Published
Author
Hastings
On the bench
Hastings
Cited by
5 cases
Authority
More cited than 84.4%

The opinion

*417 By the Court,

Hastings, Ch. J.

This action was commenced on the 8th day of March A. I). 1851, in Bute county, ninth judicial district, the plaintiffs being residents of this county, and the defendants residents of Sacramento county. The summons was issued on the 10th day of March and was served on the 12th. The answer was filed on the 14th day of April; and the term of the court commenced on the 9th day of April. The defendants had thirty days after the service, within which to answer. The default was taken on the 11th day of April, which was irregular, as thirty days had not elapsed excluding- the day of service. A jury was afterwards called, who found a verdict for plaintiffs, and final judgment was entered accordingly. These proceedings were also irregular, as the trial could not be had under the 23d and 27th Buies adopted by the supreme court for the government of the district courts. The judgment is therefore reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.