gno.law

Nickerson v. California Raisin Co.

California Supreme Court · No. 7,910 · 1882-08-22 · Published · 61 Cal. 268 · 1882 Cal. LEXIS 594

J. A. NICKERSON v. CALIFORNIA RAISIN COMPANY

Area
civil
Panel
Ross (author)

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion — Ross

Ross, J.:

To have justified the Court below in setting aside the default, an affidavit of merits on the part of the defendant was essential. Such affidavit must show that the defendant has fully and fairly stated the facts of the case to his counsel, before the advice of the latter could amount to a prima facie showing of merits on defendant’s behalf. It is obvious that a statement, such as is found in the affidavit in the present case, that, defendant has fully and fairly stated the said defendant’s defense in this action” to his counsel, does not answer *269the requirement. It might be that the defense relied on was a purely technical one, that did not touch the merits of the controversy. The expression used in the affidavit is not the equivalent of a statement that the defendant had fully and fairly stated to his counsel all the facts in the case.

Judgment and order affirmed.

Thoenton, Shabpstein, and McKinstry, JJ., concurred.

Cited by