People v. Lafarge

Citations

• 3 Cal. 130

Syllabus

<p>The respondents were bail in a recognizance conditioned for the appearance of M., to answer at court, upon an indictment found against him, on the 19tli April, 1852. M. appeared at the proper term, which was the June Term following, and on the 17th Juncmoved to quash the indictment,for causes assigned, which was ordered by the court. Another indictment on the same charge was found by the grand jury, then in session, at the same term, on the 18th June, upon which M., being called, made default. Afterwards suit was brought upon the recognizance, against the bail, and judgment obtained thereon. Held, that the bail were entitled to relief against the said judgment.</p> <p>The District Court is not limited by the present act as to the time within which it may grant relief upon a judgment unjustly or improperly obtained.</p> <p>No particular form is required by the statute in which application shall be made for such relief. All that is required is, that the facts shall be set forth, and if they show a case coming within the rule, it is sufficient.</p> <p>Where the application for such relief charges fraud, among other causes, and the applicant does not rely upon the fraud alone, for his relief, there is no error in the court granting the relief without first directing an issue to try the fraud.</p> <p>Whether good cause is shown, is a question properly addressed to the discretion of the court.</p> <p>All courts having chancery jurisdiction have power to set aside a judgment improperly obtained.</p>