Richmond

Richmond v. Shipman

Good Law
133 Cal. Rptr. 742·1976 Cal. App. LEXIS 2018·63 Cal. App. 3d 340
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 4, 1976Civ. 38320California1,227 words

Opinion

Opinion

Christian, J.

Lisa Jean Richmond appeals from a summary judgment dismissing her complaint for damages for personal injuries. On the motion for summary judgment it was shown that at 8:45 p.m. on July 25, 1974, counsel for plaintiff presented to a judge of the superior court for filing a complaint to recover damages from respondent Mary Shipman resulting from an automobile accident which occurred on July 25, 1973. The complaint bears no indication of filing by the clerk, except that it was “registered” on July 31, 1974.

Plaintiff had, at 8 p.m. on July 25, 1974, the day of the expiration of the statutory period of limitations (Code Civ. Proc., § 340, subd. 3), asked counsel to bring suit. Counsel prepared a complaint and, after the clerk’s office had closed, presented it with the filing fee to the judge at his residence. The judge accepted the complaint and marked it “filed.” Upon that showing, the court rendered a summary judgment dismissing the action as barred by limitations.

Citing Code of Civil Procedure section 167, plaintiff contends that the judge was empowered to accept and file her complaint notwithstanding the fact that it was presented at the judge’s residence after the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.