Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California

You had no legal obligation to say yes, but it was the right thing to do. Had you taken a default under these circumstances, the defendant would have brought a motion for relief which almost certainly would have been granted -- but only after you had incurred a lot of needless attorney fees opposing it. On top of that, you and your lawyer would have looked like jerks to your judge. That's not the sort of first impression either of you would want to make.

Whether you granted the extension or not, the other side would have been allowed to file their answer and proceed with the case. By granting the extension, your lawyer saved you money and prevented you from looking bad to the court. It was the right call.

In addition to what my colleague writes, the attorney is the one who determines strategy in a case. If you can't abide by your attorney's informed decision, you might want to handle the case yourself.

Mr. Hoffman is right. Had the default been entered, the defendant's attorney would have filed a motion, and your attorney would have incurred fees and wasted his time opposing a motion that the court is required to grant, especially when they are based on the alleged fault of the defense attorney. So you would have paid for a cab ride that went no where. Defaults get set aside all the time, and if you were hanging your hat on getting a default judgment, you must not have a very good case.