Legal Opinion

Lynch v. Harrell

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 16, 1941No. Civ. 2741PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

This is an action to foreclose a mortgage. A demurrer on the ground that the statute of limitations (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 337, subd. 1) had run was sustained, and the plaintiff has appealed from the judgment of dismissal.

The sole question presented is whether the four-year limitation was so extended by the provisions of section 12a of the Code of Civil Procedure as to bring the filing of this action within the time allowed. That section, so far as material here, reads as follows:

“As to any act provided or required by law to be performed within a specified period of time, such period of time…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Young v. the Young Holdings Corp., Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 1938
  2. Galusha v. FraserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Dougall v. SchulenbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Sullivan v. ShannonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  5. Adolph Ramish, Inc. v. BehrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Millsap v. HooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Gans v. SmullCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  3. Francis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945

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

Powered by the Exa API