271 P. 749 | Cal. | 1928
THE COURT.
The appellants and cross-complainants herein have moved this court for an order which would have the effect of extending the lien of an attachment issued and levied upon the real property of the plaintiff and respondent herein at the time of the filing of the cross-complaint in this action and the lien of which attachment is about to expire under the provisions of section 542a of the Code of Civil Procedure. The said motion has been presented upon the theory that, under the provisions of the section of the code above referred to, this court has by virtue of the appeal which is pending herein the sole jurisdiction to make the order sought. [1] The portion of said section of the code upon which this claim is predicated reads as follows:
"The attachment whether heretofore levied or hereafter to be levied shall be a lien upon all real property attached for a period of three years after the date of levy unless sooner released or discharged as provided in this chapter, by dismissal of the action or by entering and docketing of judgment in the action. At the expiration of three years the lien shall cease and any proceeding or proceedings against the property under the attachment shall be barred; provided, that upon motion of a party to the action, made not less than five nor more than sixty days before the expiration of said period of three years, the court in which the action *474 is pending may extend the time of said lien for a period not exceeding two years from the date on which the original lien would expire."
We are of the opinion that the clause in the foregoing portion of said section of the code which requires a motion for the extension of the lien of an attachment to be made in "the court in which the action is pending" has reference to the court wherein the action was commenced and wherein it remained pending under the provisions of section 1049 of the Code of Civil Procedure, "from the time of its commencement until its final determination upon appeal, or until the time for appeal has passed, unless the judgment is sooner satisfied." The effect of an appeal upon the pendency of an action is provided for in section
[3] It has been made to appear upon this motion that heretofore the appellant herein applied to this court for a writ of supersedeas which had for its purpose the prevention of the superior court from issuing a writ of execution at the instance of the plaintiff after the cross-complainant and appellant herein had undertaken to give a bond upon this appeal which would have the effect, under the further provisions of section
For the foregoing reasons the application of the cross-complainant and appellant herein is denied. *476