Case Name: THE PEOPLE, Appellant, v. KINGS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (a Corporation), Respondent
Court: District Court of Appeal of the State of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1920-06-05
Citations: 48 Cal. App. 795
Docket Number: Civ. No. 2144
Parties: THE PEOPLE, Appellant, v. KINGS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (a Corporation), Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Appellate Reports
Volume: 48
Pages: 795–795

Head Matter:
[Civ. No. 2144.
Third Appellate District
June 5, 1920.]
THE PEOPLE, Appellant, v. KINGS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (a Corporation), Respondent.
Dismissal of Actions—State as Plaintiff—Construction of Code Sections.—Order affirmed on the authority of People v. Kings County Development Co., ante, p. 72.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kings County dismissing an action for failure to serve the summons within three years. M. L. Short, Judge. Affirmed.
The facts are the same as in People v. Kings County Development Co., ante, p. 72, [191 Pac. 1004.]
U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, John T. J ones, C. F. Culver, R. Justin Miller and Wheaton A. Gray for Appellant.
T. T. C. Gregory, D. Hadsell and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher for Respondent.

Opinion:
THE COURT.
This is a companion case to civil No. 2142, between the same parties, this day decided. The patents herein were issued on December 22 and December 30, 1904, the action was begun December 17, 1914, summons was issued June 14, 1915, and was served September 10, 1918.
For the reasons stated in our opinion in civil No. 2142, (ante, p. 72, [191 Pac. 1004]), the order appealed from is affirmed.
A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on August 2, 1920.
All the Justices concurred, except Sloane, J., who was absent.