Kuhn v. Mason

Citations

• 24 Wash. 94
• 64 P. 182
• 1901 Wash. LEXIS 501

Syllabus

<p>JUDGMENTS-PETITION FOR VACATION — SUFFICIENCY OF ALLEGATIONS.</p> <p>Where judgment has been rendered discharging an insolvent debtor, it will not be vacatea upon the petition of a creditor whose petition does not allege that he presented his claim against the estate and brought himself within the statute, so far as the duty of a creditor is concerned; nor that he is otherwise interested in the judgment rendered; nor that, in case of its vacation, the subsequent proceedings would not result in the same judgment.</p> <p>SAME-VACATING-LACHES OF PETITIONER.</p> <p>Although Bal. Code, § 5156, requires proceedings for the vacation of judgments to be brought within one year after their rendition, the right to grant or deny the petition is discretionary with the trial court, and its refusal to grant a petition to vacate when the year of limitation was within three days of expiration would not constitute abuse of discretion, where there is no showing of diligence on the part of the petitioner, nor of any reason why he had not proceeded earlier.</p> <p>SAME — IMPROPER REMEDY FOE REVIEWING ERRORS OF LAW.</p> <p>Bal. Code, § 5153, subd. 3, which authorizes a court to vacate or modify its judgment after the term at which it was' rendered, for “irregularity in obtaining the judgment or. order,” does not contemplate that errors of law committed by the court may be corrected by motion to vacate, since tbe proper remedy in case of sucb errors is an appeal from tbe judgment.</p>