Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

39 Cal. 450

Carpentier v. Minturn

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1870

California Supreme Court · decided 1870-07-01

<p>Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth District, City and County of San Francisco.</p> <p>The facts are stated in the opinion.</p>

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 1922

3 state decisions

Relies on Grigsby v. Napa County · Dupuy v. Shear · Reynolds v. Page

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1870-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Rhodes, C. J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court:

¶2The plaintiff having filed his complaint, procured a summons and a certified copy of the complaint, but mislaid them, and did not discover them until after the expiration *451of more than, eight years. Soon after finding them, he caused them to be served on .the defendants. The excuse for the delay in serving the papers is, that he mislaid and forgot them. The Court, on the defendant’s motion, ordered the summons to be set aside and the complaint to be stricken from the files. There was no abuse of discretion in granting the motion, and, in our opinion, the order was fully justified by the facts presented in the affidavits. (See Dupuy v. Shear, 29 Cal. 241; Reynolds v. Page, 35 Cal. 296; Grigsby v. Napa County, 36 Cal. 585.)

¶3Judgment affirmed.

¶4Wallace, J., being disqualified, did not participate in the decision.

/39/cal/450 · .json · Public domain