136 Cal. App. 411 - Zuver v. General Development Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1934
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2004
10 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Waybright v. Anderson · Doak v. Bruson · 113 Cal. App. 118 - Smith v. Pickwick Stages System · 43 Cal. App. 425 - Williams v. Reed · 15 Cal. App. 341 - Bernou v. Bernou
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The affidavits which were presented for and against the motion to set aside the default judgment were conflicting with respect to the essential facts related. Since the evidence is conflicting upon which the motion to set aside the default judgment was denied, this court may not interfere with the discretion of the trial court with respect thereto. (Citing cases.) It was exclusively the province of the trial judge to determine the credibility of affiants and the weight of the evidence adduced. (Sheehan v. Osborn, 138 Cal. 512, 515 [ 71 Pac. 622 ] ; Smith v. Pickwick Stages System, 113 Cal. App. 118 [ 297 Pac. 940 ].) Regarding the effect of conflicting affidavits upon an order denying a motion to set aside a default judgment, it is said in Williams v. Reed, 43 Cal. App. 425, 431 [ 185 Pac. 515 ] : “ 1 Thus, we see that a very sharp and decided conflict as to the questions presented was present. Under these conditions, we are powerless to interfere with the conclusion of the trial court herein. The rule is, as it has been so frequently stated, both by the Supreme Court as well as by this court, that “in the consideration of an appeal from an order made upon affidavits, etc., involving the decision of a question of fact, this court is bound by the same rule that controls it where oral testimony is presented for review. If there is any conflict in the affidavits, those in favor of the prevailing party must be taken as true, and the facts stated therein must be taken as establis”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Schwerin v. McCarthy
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.