Pittsburgh Coal Mining Co. v. Greenwood
Before: Temple
Synopsis
Practice.—Pleading.—A judgment on default for damages is erroneous, if no amount of damages, nor a prayer for damages, be contained in the complaint, notwithstanding the complaint states facts sufficient to sustain a judgment for damages.
Temple, J., delivered the opinion of the Court:
The complaint in this case states facts sufficient to sustain a judgment for damages, but the amount of damages is not stated in the complaint, nor is there a prayer for damages. No damages are stated or claimed in the summons. The defendants, who appeal, made default, and judgment was rendered against them for twelve thousand five hundred dollars damages. This was clearly erroneous, and that part of the judgment which awards damages against the appellants must be reversed and set aside; and it is ordered that the judgment be so modified.
Mr. Justice Wallace, being disqualified, did not participate in the decision.
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)