Helms v. Dunne

Citations

• 107 Cal. 117
• 40 P. 100
• 1895 Cal. LEXIS 719

Syllabus

<p>Justice's Court of San Francisco—Summons—Signature.—A summons issued from the justice’s court of the city and county of San Francisco is properly issued by the justice’s clerk, upon the order of the presiding justice, and it need not be signed by the justice of the peace, as provided by section 844 of the Code of Civil Procedure.</p> <p>Id.—Construction of Code—Special Legislation.—Chapter V, article I, of title I of the Code of Civil Procedure is not special legislation, and section 91 of that code contains a modification of the rule declared in section 844 regarding the proper party to sign a summons in the justice’s court of the city and county of San Francisco.</p> <p>Id.—Designation of Justice’s Clerk—Technical Variance.—Although the proper designation of the officer authorized to sign and issue summons, under section 95 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is “justice’s clerk,” yet a technical variance in a signature to a summons by that clerk by the designation of himself as “clerk of the said court,” viz., the justice’s court, is a variance so slight and unimportant as to involve no question of jurisdiction.</p> <p>Id.—Mistake in Recital of Name of Presiding Justice.—Though the summons may upon its face recite that it was issued at the order of the presiding justice, there is no statutory requirement to that effect, and the recital is not conclusive as to the fact, especially where a mistake appears in the recital of the name of the person who was at the time presiding justice; and it may be proved that the order was in fact made by the presiding justice, though he is another person than the one whose name is recited in the summons.</p>