Anstey v. Beebe
In this boundary dispute case, Paul Anstey appeals from the summary judgment in favor of respondents Dion Beebe and Unjoo Moon. He asks that we reverse the judgment because: his wife, Denise Anstey, is an indispensable party to the boundary dispute; he is entitled to relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473[1]; respondents’ unopposed motion for summary judgment did not satisfy their initial burden of production; and the trial court failed to adequately balance the equities.
We conclude the judgment is not infirm for lack of a necessary or indispensable party, that appellant has not shown entitlement to relief under either the mandatory or discretionary provisions of section 473, and that, on the merits, respondents were entitled to summary judgment. We therefore shall affirm the judgment.
Comments on Anstey v. Beebe