Hansen

This action was commenced in the superior court of the state of California, in and for the county of Santa Barbara, and the proceedings therein progressed until a decree was entered June 26, 1916. Thereafter defendant applied, under section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for leave to answer; the application having been made within a year after the rendition of said decree.

[1] The court made an order on February 7, 1917, allowing the defendant to answer within 10 days from that date. On February 13, *284 1917, the defendant filed a petition and bond to remove tire cause to-this court. On the same date, to wit, February 13, 1917, defendant filed an answer and cross-complaint, seeking a personal judgment, against the plaintiff. The record presented to this court shows that the answer and cross-complaint appear in the record following the-petition and bond for removal. The court cannot assume from this-fact that the cross-complaint was filed subsequent to the petition for removal. The parties have discussed the case as though it were filed subsequent to filing the petition and bond. It does not seem to make-any difference whether it was filed contemporaneous with the petition…