“Here, the parties submitted affidavits with conflicting statements as to whether an oral agreement existed. While the trial court may have considered the parties’ affidavits, some matters are ‘too grave to be decided on affidavits.’ [Citation]. Unless the facts are undisputed or the right to a hearing is waived, a party or attorney is entitled to more than a trial by affidavit. We conclude that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion by entering default judgment without hearing testimony on the question of whether an oral agreement existed, and if so, what the agreement provided. We remand to permit the trial court to do so.”
Reversed and remanded.
Recommended for publication in the official reports.