Potter v. City of Compton

THOMAS J. POTTER, Respondent, v. THE CITY OF COMPTON (a Municipal Corporation) et al., Appellants.

COUNSEL

Ralph K. Pierson, City Attorney, Mitchell & Johnson and James H. Mitchell for Appellants.

Swaffield & Swaffield, Kenneth Sperry and Joseph E. Madden for Respondent.

OPINION

Shinn, J., pro tem.

[1] Appellants challenge the jurisdiction of the trial court to grant relief from the default of respondent, resulting from his inadvertent failure to file his memorandum of costs within the statutory time after notice of entry of judgment. Upon authority of Soda v. Marriot, 130 Cal. App. 589 [20 PaCal.2d 758], we hold that the court had jurisdiction to make the order appealed from, and it is therefore affirmed.

Houser, P.J., and Doran, J., concurred.