Rue

The plaintiff brought this action against upwards of forty defendants to recover the possession of certain lands in the city of San Diego. Service upon the respondent herein was had by the publication of the summons, and upon her failure to answer the complaint judgment *Page 654 was rendered against her by default. This judgment was entered on July 15, 1895, and on July 28, 1899, a motion was made on her behalf to set the same aside, upon the ground that it had been entered without any jurisdiction having been obtained over her person, and was therefore void. The motion was made upon the record of the judgment, and upon the hearing thereof was granted. The plaintiff has appealed. A motion to set aside a judgment upon the ground that it appears upon the face of the judgment record that the court had no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant is a direct attack upon the judgment, and is not barred by mere lapse of time. (People v. Mullan, 65 Cal. 396 ; People v. Greene, 74 Cal. 400 . 1 ) Cases in which judgments by default rendered upon substituted service have been sustained, upon the ground that the attack was collateral rather than direct, are therefore inapplicable. There…

Upon further consideration of this cause, after hearing in Bank, we are satisfied with the conclusion reached by Department One in its opinion filed September 24, 1901, and for the reasons stated in said opinion the order is reversed. Harrison, J., Van Dyke, J., McFarland, J., and Henshaw, J., concurred. The following is the opinion rendered in Department One, above referred to: —