People v. Hager
Before: Baldwin
Synopsis
In this case—suit for delinquent taxes in Colusa county under the Act of 1860, (Stat. 1860, 246)—the complaint having set forth various items, as State tax, General County Bund, School, Building, Indigent Sick and Contingent tax, demurrer was filed and overruled, and answer filed. Plaintiff then moved, without notice to defendant, to strike out answer. Granted, and judgment at once entered for plaintiff for the full amount claimed : Held, that, as there appears to be no authority for levying the Contingent and Building tax, the complaint shows no cause of action as to these items, and that the judgment is thus far unauthorized and will be set aside.
Cause remanded, with permission to defendant to set up any defense he may have.
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Field, C. J. and Cope, J. concurring.
The judgment by default in this case is erroneous. The judgment is for, among other things, Contingent tax, and, for the year 1859, for Building tax, levied by the Board of Supervisors. We have been referred to no authority for levying these items, and yet judgment is given for them. The judgment, so far, is wholly unauthorized—the complaint showing no cause of action as to those items. As judgment was rendered in the absence of defendant, we think it best to remand the case, that he may set up his defense, if he has any, except as above indicated.
So ordered.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)