§Why CasetextPricing

Notice_of_motion

Motion

7 Cited authorities

  1. Weitz v. Yankosky

    63 Cal.2d 849 (Cal. 1966)   Cited 182 times
    Making this statement in the context of vacating a default

  2. Buckert v. Briggs

    15 Cal.App.3d 296 (Cal. Ct. App. 1971)   Cited 40 times
    Upholding discretionary relief where attorney not only failed to inform client of the trial date but attorney also failed to appear at trial

  3. Goya v. P.E.R.U. Enterprises

    87 Cal.App.3d 886 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978)   Cited 25 times
    Finding no actual notice under section 473.5 notwithstanding the fact that certain parties were served with the summons and complaint via substitute service

  4. Sanford v. Smith

    11 Cal.App.3d 991 (Cal. Ct. App. 1970)   Cited 35 times
    Approving the standards of diligence required by the local rules of Los Angeles Superior Court: recent inquiries of all relatives, friends, and other persons likely to know defendant's whereabouts; searches of city directories, telephone directories, tax rolls, and register of voters; and inquiries made of occupants of all real estate involved in the litigation

  5. Slusher v. Durrer

    69 Cal.App.3d 747 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977)   Cited 15 times
    In Slusher, supra, 69 Cal.App.3d 747, 138 Cal.Rptr. 265, the plaintiff obtained a default judgment against the defendant on her civil complaint alleging assault and battery.

  6. Berman v. Klassman

    17 Cal.App.3d 900 (Cal. Ct. App. 1971)   Cited 10 times

    Docket No. 34470. May 26, 1971. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Nos. 832122, 866166, Ellsworth Meyer, Judge. COUNSEL Zerner Sims and Edward S. Sims for Plaintiff and Appellant. John E. Sisson and John E. Sisson, Jr., for Defendant and Respondent. OPINION FRAMPTON, J.[fn*] — [fn*] Retired judge of the superior court sitting under assignment by the Chairman of the Judicial Council. Statement of the Case Plaintiff appeals from two minute orders made in consolidated superior court actions

  7. Section 473 - Mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 473   Cited 6,006 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Allowing up to six months to challenge a judgment entered through the moving party's mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect