 The court may also in its discretion allow a party to file his pleadings after the time limited therefor; and shall relieve a party from a judgment taken against him, through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect, and supply an omission...  Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Judicature of ... - Page 314by Indiana. Supreme Court, Horace E. Carter, Albert Gallatin Porter, Gordon Tanner, Benjamin Harrison, Michael Crawford Kerr, James Buckley Black, Augustus Newton Martin, Francis Marion Dice, John Worth Kern, John Lewis Griffiths, Sidney Romelee Moon, Charles Frederick Remy - 1882Full view - About this book
 | Indiana - Law - 1921 - 1060 pages
...the facts proved, where the amendment will not deprive a party of any substantial right. The court shall relieve a party from a judgment taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, on complaint filed and notice issued, as in original actions within... | |
 | Civil procedure - 1859 - 616 pages
...entered, on failure to answer, viz.: by motion addressed to large discretion vested in the court to relieve a party from a judgment taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (Code, § 174.) But no appeal could be taken from a judgment by default.... | |
 | Nathan Howard (Jr.) - Civil procedure - 1867 - 636 pages
...warrant any such interference by the court. 1. Although section 174 of the Code allows the court to relieve a party from a judgment " taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect," no case of such character is made by the affidavits on the part of... | |
 | Indiana. Supreme Court, Horace E. Carter, Albert Gallatin Porter, Gordon Tanner, Benjamin Harrison, Michael Crawford Kerr, James Buckley Black, Augustus Newton Martin, Francis Marion Dice, John Worth Kern, John Lewis Griffiths, Sidney Romelee Moon, Charles Frederick Remy - Law reports, digests, etc - 1869 - 712 pages
...Shecks or himself. It is provided by section 99 of the code (2 G. & H. 118), that the court may, " in its discretion, allow a party to file his pleadings after the time limited therefor; and at auy time within one year relieve a party from a judgment taken against him through his mistake,... | |
 | South Carolina. Supreme Court, J. S. G. Richardson, Robert Wallace Shand, Cyprian Melanchthon Efird, William Hay Townsend, Duncan C. Ray, William Munro Shand - Law reports, digests, etc - 1918 - 638 pages
...showing mads for relief under Code Civ. Proc. 1912, sec. 225, providing that within a year the Court may relieve a party from a judgment taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, the same relief could be given after the time for appeal has expired... | |
 | Abraham Clark Freeman - Judgments - 1873 - 590 pages
...discretion, and on such terms as may be just, at any time within one year after notice thereof, to relieve a party from a judgment taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect."1 In other States, this provision has been substantially copied, except... | |
 | Law - 1898 - 562 pages
...under 2 Hill's Code, §221, providing that the court may, upon affidavit showing good cause therefor, relieve a party from a Judgment taken against him through his mistake, Inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. — DENTON v. MERCHANTS' NAT. BANK OP SEATTLE, Wash., 51 Pac. Rep.... | |
 | William Wait - Civil procedure - 1874 - 910 pages
...ample power in this respect is conferred by the provisions of the Code, which authorizes the court to relieve a party from a judgment taken against him "through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect," at any time within one year after notice of the judgment. Code, §... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1877 - 682 pages
...ground, and the provision of section 174 of the Code limiting the time within which the court could relieve a party from a judgment taken against him through his " mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect," did not apply. Also held, That the appeal of the defendant's, appellants,... | |
| |
