Mercantile Banking Co. v. Hernandez
MERCANTILE BANKING COMPANY, S. A. (a Corporation) v. JOSE M. HERNANDEZ
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Jennings (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 — Jennings
JENNINGS, J.
The appeal . herein is from an order vacating and setting aside the default of the defendant *511entered by the clerk—an order made before the entry of any judgment "in the action. Such an order, where it appears that no judgment has been entered upon the. default, is not the subject of a separate appeal. It is in no sense an order made after judgment and is not one of the interlocutory orders enumerated in section 963 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Savage v. Smith, 154 Cal. 325 [97 Pac. 821]; Rauer’s Law etc. Co. v. Standley, 3 Cal. App. 44 [84 Pac. 214] ; Rose v. Lelande, 17 Cal. App. 308 [119 Pac. 532]; LaPique v. Plummer, 24 Cal. App. 685 [142 Pac. 107].)
The appeal is dismissed.
Barnard, P. J., and Marks, J., concurred.
Cites, in this corpus
- Lapique v. Plummer Civ. No. 1303. · 1914-06-03
- Rose v. Lelande Civ. No. 1070. · 1911-10-24
- Savage v. Smith S.F. No. 5068. · 1908-10-06
- Rauer's Law & Collection Co. v. Standley Civ. No. 192. · 1906-02-08