SCOTT v. McPHEETERS (1939)

The petition for a hearing is denied. In denying said petition, we expressly withhold our approval of that portion of the opinion found in the first two sentences of the fifth paragraph thereof, which portion seems to deal with the time when the statute of limitations would begin to run on an action which might be maintained by a father or mother in his or her own right under section 376 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This is not such an action but is an action brought by the child. The portion of the opinion above referred to was not therefore necessary to the decision and it does not affect the soundness of the conclusion reached by the District Court of Appeal.

I dissent.

Since according to my interpretation of the constitutional powers conferred upon this court,—on the hearing of a petition for the hearing of a cause after decision has been had therein by the District Court of Appeal,—no authority exists in this court other than either to grant or to deny such petition, I am constrained to dissent from that part of the foregoing order which in effect modifies the judgment that was rendered by the District Court of Appeal. Wires v. Litle, 27 Cal.App.2d 240, at page 245, 80 P.2d 1010, 82 P.2d 388.

PER CURIAM.