In a personal injury action brought by a former husband who alleges that the date of entry of judgment is suspect because it is not supported by a sworn statement?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Marriage of Patscheck, In re, 180 Cal.App.3d 800, 225 Cal.Rptr. 787 (Cal. App. 1986):
Former husband's argument turns on his assertion that the date of entry of judgment is suspect because it is not supported by a sworn statement and because it is the same as the date of filing. There is nothing suspicious or improper in either circumstance. Official records of actions taken by a court clerk are presumed correct (see Tate v. Superior Court (1975) 45 Cal.App.3d 925, 929, 119 Cal.Rptr. 835) and need not be supported by sworn statements. Entry of a judgment or order on the date of filing is commonplace.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
