Nason

First National Bank v. Nason

Good Law
115 Cal. 626·1897 Cal. LEXIS 485·47 P. 595
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 1897L. A. No. 141California644 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Searls, J.

This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment of dismissal of its action for want of prosecution.

The action was brought May 28, 1892, to recover three thousand five hundred dollars and interest on a promissory note made by defendant April 3, 1888, payable sixty days after date. Summons issued April 20, 1893, and was served January 4, 1894. Defendant filed his answer February 7, 1894, which, if true, constituted a defense ta the action. August 7, 1895, defendant moved to dismiss the action, and the motion was granted August 16, 1895.

From the foregoing statement it appears that at the date of dismissal the action had been pending oyer three years.

The bill of exceptions in addition to the above shows, on the part of defendant, that for two years next before the motion to dismiss he had resided in the city of San Diego, and as a supervisor of the county of San Diego had occupied an office in the superior court building.

On the part of plaintiff the bill of exceptions shows that the reason plaintiff had not prosecuted its action was that defendant had threatened to go into insolvency, under the laws of this state, if plaintiff pushed its action to judgment against him, in…

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.