Eckstrand

This is an appeal by the defendant from an order denying her motion for a change of place of trial.

The action was commenced in the county of Humboldt. In due time the defendant appeared, filed a demurrer and moved to transfer the cause to the city and county of San Francisco on the ground that she was a resident of said city and county. The motion was denied. The question is whether the action on the record presented is local or transitory.

It is conceded that the real property, described in the complaint herein, is situated in Humboldt County and that the residence of the defendant is in the city and county of San Francisco. In order to determine whether the action is local or transitory it is necessary to ascertain the true character of the action as disclosed by the complaint, and the character of the judgment which might be rendered upon a default thereto. (Grocers’ etc. Union v. Kern etc. Co., 150 Cal. 466 [ 89 Pac. 120 ]; McFarland v. Martin, 144 Cal. 771 [ 78 Pac. 239 ]; 25 Cal. Jur., p. 855.) When local and transitory actions are joined in the same complaint, the action is regarded as transitory so far as the right of the defendant to the place of trial is concerned,…