Kelly v. Van Austin
Citations
- 17 Cal. 564
Syllabus
<p>Wheke, in an action against defendants jointly and not severally liable, a portion only of them are served with process, the Cleric cannot, on the application of plaintiff, enter judgment upon default against the parties served only. A judgment so entered is void.</p> <p>The proper course in such case is, to enter judgment against all the defendants, but so as to be enforced against the joint property of all and the separate property of those served.</p> <p>Where the action is against defendants severally liable, a portion only being served with process, the Clerk can, on application of plaintiff, enter judgment, upon default, against the parties served, without regard to the other parties named in the complaint.</p> <p>In entering judgments upon default, the Clerk acts in a mere ministerial capacity; exercises no judicial functions; and must conform strictly to the provisions of the statute, or his proceedings will be without any binding force.</p>
Judges: Field
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
18 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Burtnett v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court· 1949-05-06· cited 117×
- Reinhart v. LugoCalifornia Supreme Court· 1890-11-20· cited 38×
- Willson v. CleavelandCalifornia Supreme Court· 1866-07-15· cited 34×
- Wharton v. HarlanCalifornia Supreme Court· 1886-01-28· cited 27×
- Dibble v. HansonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1907-11-13· cited 21×
- Cook v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1936-10-07· cited 20×
- Hodgdon v. GoodspeedOregon Supreme Court· 1911-10-03· cited 19×
- Boyd v. SteeleIdaho Supreme Court· 1899-11-20· cited 16×
- Blount v. GallaherSupreme Court of Florida· 1886-01-15· cited 15×
- Wallace v. EldredgeCalifornia Supreme Court· 1865-07-01· cited 12×
- Utah Ass'n of Credit Men v. BowmanUtah Supreme Court· 1911-01-13· cited 11×
- Ropes v. Snyder Harris Bassett Co.Supreme Court of Florida· 1896-01-15· cited 8×
- Lacoste v. EastlandCalifornia Supreme Court· 1897-08-30· cited 7×
- Benítez v. La Corte de Distrito de HumacaoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1927-03-18· cited 7×
- Smith v. WilsonSupreme Court of Florida· 1916-05-18· cited 5×
- Welsh v. KirkpatrickCalifornia Supreme Court· 1866-07-15· cited 5×
- Daniell v. CampbellSupreme Court of Florida· 1924-06-13· cited 3×
- Benítez v. District Court of HumacaoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1927-03-18
Cites
1 case in this archive is cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.