Pardy v. Montgomery
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The action was brought on the twenty-third day of June, 1880, to recover damages for breach of a contract. On the 81st of July, 1885, judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants, dismissing the action for want of prosecution. From this judgment the plaintiff appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The action was brought on the twenty-third day of June, 1880, to recover damages for breach of a contract. On the 81st of July, 1885, judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants, dismissing the action for want of prosecution. From this judgment the plaintiff appeals. The transcript contained a notice of motion for the dismissal of the action for want of prosecution, and certain affidavits purporting to show the circumstances un der which the dismissal was had. These affidavits were not embodied in a…
1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.
We cannot take notice of the affidavits in the transcript, showing, as claimed by the appellant, the circumstances under which this action was dismissed " by the court below, for the reason that it is not shown in any mode that such affidavits were used on the hearing of the application in that court.
The court below had power to dismiss the action for want of prosecution (see Code Civ. Proc., sec. 581), and there being no showing to the contrary, we must presume that the court below exercised its power properly and within the rules prescribed by law.
Judgment affirmed.
' Searls, C. J., Works,…
2Cited by11 opinions
- In Re WinchesterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Bond v. BondSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1928
- People Ex Rel. Stone v. JefferdsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Solomon v. SolomonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- McLaughlin v. ClausenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.