Court Opinion

ID: 9864634
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 14:30:47.717095+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:17:15.426692
License: Public Domain

THE COURT.
The petition for a rehearing of this cause in the supreme court is denied.
We base this action upon the proposition that upon the face of the record of the judgment in the case of Shafe & *424Post v. Dallas, mentioned in the opinion of the district court of .appeal, there was sufficient evidence of the service of the summons on Dallas to give the clerk prima facie authority to enter the default and judgment against him. We do not approve of that part of the opinion of the district court which appears to indicate or decide that the presumptions of jurisdiction upon a judgment thus entered by the clerk are the same as those which attend a judgment entered in pursuance of judicial action by the court. (See Kelly v. Van Austin, 17 Cal. 564; Bond v. Pacheco, 30 Cal. 533.) But as the authority of the clerk to enter the judgment appeared from the face of the record, the doctrine just stated is not essential to support the conclusion of the district court that the judgment was valid. (Providence Tool Co. v. Prader, 32 Cal. 634, [91 Am. Dec. 598.].)