Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

C. H. HANCOCK and JOHN KELSO v. JAMES BOWMAN and WM. BOFER

         JUDGES: McKinstry, J. Mr. Justice Rhodes did not express an opinion.

         OPINION

          McKINSTRY, Judge

         The complaint alleges that both defendants are owners of the lot against which it is sought to enforce the assessment. The default of Bowman was entered, but the summons was never served on Bofer, nor was there any attempt to take his default. Yet the decree provides for the sale of the lot, and that both defendants--and all persons claiming under them--be forever barred and foreclosed from asserting any right or title in the premises, etc. The statute gives no authority for a decree enforcing the lien, in the absence of Bofer, one of the parties in interest. (People v. Doe , 48 Cal. 560.)

         The motion to " strike out" the judgment-roll was properly denied.

         Judgment reversed and cause remanded for further proceedings.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Hancock v. Bowman
(Oct 1, 1874)