Summary
In Pardy v. Montgomery, 77 Cal. 326, it was decided that "the court had power to dismiss the action for want of prosecution (see Code Civ. Proc., sec. 581), and, there being no showing to the contrary, we must presume that the court below exercised its power properly and within the rules prescribed by law."
Summary of this case from People v. JefferdsOpinion
Rehearing denied.
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco.
COUNSEL:
W. T. Baggett, and Samuel T. Birdsall, for Appellant.
W. S. Goodfellow, for Respondents.
JUDGES: In Bank. Thornton, J. Searls, C. J., Works, J., Paterson, J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.
OPINION
THORNTON, Judge
We cannot take notice of the affidavits in the transcript, showing, as claimed by the appellant, the circumstances under which this action was dismissed by the court below, for the reason that it is not shown in any mode that such affidavits were used on the hearing of the application in that court.
The court below had power to dismiss the action for want of prosecution (see Code Civ. Proc., sec. 581), and there being no showing to the contrary, we must presume that the court below exercised its power properly and within the rules prescribed by law.
Judgment affirmed.