Legal Opinion

Rosenfelt v. Scholtz

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 12, 1936No. Civ. 11134PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCrail, P. J.

This is an appeal by plaintiff from a judgment dismissing an action under section 583 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides (1) that the court may in its discretion dismiss any action for want of prosecution whenever plaintiff has failed for two years after the action is filed to bring such action to trial, and (2) that “any action . . . shall be dismissed . . . unless such action is brought to trial within five years after the plaintiff has filed his action, except where the parties have stipulated in writing that the time may be extended”. The contention of the plaintiff is that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Miller & Lux Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  2. City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court of Tuolumne Cty.California Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Sedarovich v. PaulCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Anderson v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  2. Hunt v. United Artists Studio Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Hastings v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  4. Nunn v. JPMorgan Chase BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API