Case ID: cal_11/html/0047-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Field, J., delivered the opinion of the Court", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

McGregor v. Shaw et al.
    
    The allegations of a complaint are confessed by a default.
    Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, County of San Francisco.
    The question in this case turned on the sufficiency of the complaint, which is in substance as follows:
    The defendant had commenced an action against the plaintiff, to recover some $3000, alleged to have been loaned to her by the plaintiff. The plaintiff had a valid and meritorious defense against this claim, but for the sake of peace, and to avoid litigation, he paid her five hundred dollars in full satisfaction of her pretended cause of action. She accepted that amount in full satisfaction, and executed and delivered to him a full release under seal, a copy of which is annexed to his complaint.
    When he paid the money, she also promised to have her action immediately dismissed. Relying upon this promise, the plaintiff filed no answer. Instead of complying with her promise, and notwithstanding she had formally released the cause of action and received the consideration for the release, the defendant fraudulently caused a judgment by default to be entered in the action against the plaintiff, for the full amount of her claim, and fraudulently withheld the execution upon the judgment until after the term expired at which the judgment was entered, with the design thereby of precluding the plaintiff from having the judgment set aside by motion in the Court in which it was entered.
    The plaintiff had no notice of the entry of judgment until the term had expired. The defendant then issued execution on the judgment, and the first information the plaintiff had of the fraud practiced upon him, was by the levy of an execution on his property. He applied to the Court to set aside the judgment, which was done; but on the defendant’s appeal, the Supreme Court reversed this order of the Court, on the ground that the term having expired, the Court had no power to set aside the judgment.
    To this complaint the defendant demurred.
    The demurrer was overruled, and the defendant having declined to answer, a decree was entered in the Court below, declaring the former judgment fraudulent and void, and perpetually enjoining its execution.
    From this decree the defendant appealed.
    
      B. S. Brooks for Appellants.
    
      Crockett & Crittenden for Respondent.
   Field, J., delivered the opinion of the Court

Terry C. J., concurring.

The complaint in this case states facts sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to the relief he seeks; and its allegations being confessed by the default, the decree was properly entered, and must be affirmed. So ordered.