Vrooman v. Li Po Tai
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City ¿nd County of San Francisco. J. M. Seawell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court,
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
This appeal is from a judgment of foreclosure. • The action was commenced July 23, 1877, in the district court. Summons was issued and served on the same day, but was not returned or filed until September 26, 1893. The only question involved in the appeal is whether the right to prosecute the action has been lost under the provisions of section 581 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Li Po Tai never formally appeared in the action, but July 31,1877, Messrs. Howe and Rosenbaum procured a stipulation from plaintiff’s attorney granting an extension of time, which was filed August 6, 1877. Upon this…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State ex rel. Curtis v. McCulloughNevada Supreme Court · 1867
- Rhoads v. RhoadsIllinois Supreme Court · 1867
- Kreiss v. HotalingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Scarborough v. DuganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Nelson v. NelsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Tresway Aero, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Fontana Land Co. v. LaughlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Davenport v. Superior Court of Imperial CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- White v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Davis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.