Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 23.pdf/42

 22

The Green Bag

Boutwell Dunlap, I. Harris, Beverly L. Hodghead, Grant H. Smith and Curtis

in default. This, we think, should never be required. A party who has been duly

H. Lindley (ex oﬁicio). The committee

brought into court and has defaulted should never be heard to complain of

had met weekly for the past year, and

its report is an able document, fortiﬁed by a careful discussion of all the legal questions involved.

The report drew

forth wide and favorable comment from the California press. As these recommendations will be of interest not only in the code states but throughout the country, we present the following greatly condensed summary of the report :

any relief that is given to his opponent so long as the pleadings have not been amended." It is therefore proposed that section 650 of the Code, relating to bills of

exceptions, be amended by the addition of the words, “but the bill need not be served upon any party whose default has been duly entered."

III. New Trials

CIVIL PROCEDURE 1. The Pleadings "One of the steps in an action where much delay occurs is in bringing the cause to issue. The time demurrer is a

frequent cause of delay.

We believe

that if the defendant were required to answer and demur at the same time no injustice would result and, on the other

hand, we think the practice of raising immaterial points by demurrer, which is now prevalent, would be greatly discouraged.” To that end amendments to the

California Code of Civil Procedure are offered, allowing the defendant to demur and answer at the same time within the time required in the summons for answering, providing that the defendant shall be deemed to have waived the right to answer if he demurs without answering, and striking out ambiguity, unintelligibility and uncertainty as grounds of demurrer. Another amend ment is also favored, which makes speciﬁc denials unnecessary, so that a general

denial may be made in every case.

"We believe that the present procedure on motion for new trial is a cause of much delay in litigation." Several amendments designed to simplify the practice are therefore recommended. One would strike out the provision

for moving upon a bill of exceptions or statement of the case. Under the present code the motion for a new trial is seldom made on the minutes of the

court, but under the proposed section it can only be made upon afﬁdavits or the minutes of the court.

Others would provide that no notice of intention to move for a new trial need be served upon any party whose default

has been duly entered, that the ten days shall run for original and reply affidavits alike and that the requirement that the notice of intention shall set forth the particular errors upon which the party

will rely be dispensed with. Another amendment would allow the court a hearing ona motion for a new trial, to consider all depositions, docu mentary evidence and oral testimony material to the case, whether produced

with the notice or not. II. Exceptions

“Under the present practice it is sometimes necessary to serve bills of exceptions, notices, etc., upon a party

Still other amendments would dis pense with the requirement that on appeal from the order granting or re

fusing a new trial, the losing party shall