Legal Opinion

Kruly v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 11, 1932No. Docket No. 8289PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCraig, Acting P. J.

In an action commenced in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County against the petitioners herein, as defendants, the plaintiff, pursuant to all preliminary proceedings the regularity of which is not in question, introduced his evidence and rested. Some years thereafter the same was reset, whereupon the said defend ants moved to dismiss the action upon the ground that section 583 of the Code of Civil Procedure constituted a mandatory legislative cessation of the cause of action. Said section recites, in part: “ . . . Any action heretofore or hereafter commenced shall be dismissed by the court…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Boyd v. Southern Pacific R. R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Hoopes v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Goldborten v. ScottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  2. Rauer's Law & Collection Co. v. HigginsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  3. Barton v. PierceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API