The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1906-12-08

within fifteen days after the first pub
i1cation of the summons. Any person
claiming a right to the property can
become party to the action WITHIN
three months after it is begun.
| 1t is also required that a description
OF the property must be recorded with
the County Recorder, In book to be
used specially for that purpose. 1t is
further provided that mo judgment
must be given by default, but the court
must require proof of the facts alleged
In the pleadings."
The judgment when given shall as
certain and determine all of the estate,
rights, title, interest and claim In and
TO the said property"
All actions under the act must be
commenced before July 1. 1903.
IN REM QUESTION NOT VITAL
In reply to the argument that the
action cannot be in rem simply because
the Legislature so terms 1T, 1t is point
ed out that the process of the law is
but little different from that In which
an heir obtains title to the property of
deceased person, which is regarded as
in rem.
But" continues the decision, I'VE
need not enter into further discussion
of the point, since we do not consider
1t necessary in this case to determine
whether or not the action is strictly
In rem. 1t is a quasi action In rem,
the court says, and is similar to cases
commenced against property of debt
ors, or which are instituted to appor-
ton real estate, foreclose mortgage
or enforce lien. 1t has the character
istics of a suit to quiet title.
Various decisions are quoted to show
that the obtaining of a title by this
method could not deprive person of
the possession of property without due
process of law. 1t is pointed out that
If the summons must be directed to
definite claimants, 1t would result In
much confusion in regard to a number
of other actions, as well as the one I'M
der consideration. Regarding this the
following statement is made:
If the State has no power to bring
nonresident into the state 1t is i'm
potent TO- protecit, ne TT, titles OF H. real a
liens, and cloud cast upon such title
by nonresident would remain for all
time a cloud unless such nonresident
shall voluntarily come into the courts
for the purpose of having 1t adjudged.
NO HIGHER APPEAL
Attorney j. F. Bowie who has been
associated with the defense of the act.
before reading through the decision
yesterday, stated that 1T would not be
possible to appeal the case to the
United States court. That could only
be done in case no provision had been
made for allowing opposing claimants
to present their cases.
Carrot w. McEnerney is confined to
his bed with a bad cold, but this did
not prevent his expressing pleasure re-
garding the action of the Supreme
Court when Interviewed last night
1T is certainly gratifying to know
that the decision was signed by all the
Justices of the Supreme Court" said
McEnerney. 1T is a matter of much
local Importance and is of interest to
every owner OF real property in San
Francisco.
1T is my opinion that it would be
advisable for every owner of real estate
in the city to begin action for the
restoration of titles to property at an
early date. Witnesses may move away
or may die, and the longer the suit for
restoration is delayed the more dan
ger there will be of failure"