What are the grounds for dismissal of an action for lack of diligence in serving the summons?

In Ordway v. Arata, 150 Cal.App.2d 71, 309 P.2d 919, the summons and complaint were not served until two years and seven months after the action was commenced. It was said therein (p. 74, 309 P.2d p. 921): 'The statutes relating to dismissal of action for lack of prosecution are sections 581a and 583 of the Code of Civil Procedure. * * * In addition to the statutory grounds for dismissal of actions for lack of prosecution the court has inherent power limited by sound discretion to dismiss an action for want of reasonable diligence in the prosecution thereof.' In that case the trial court dismissed the action, and the order of dismissal was reversed on appeal. That action was for money lent and it was established that the money was unpaid. In that case there were extenuating circumstances such as illness and death of one of the plaintiffs, and illness of plaintiffs' attorney.

In Thompson v. Lester, 20 Cal.App.2d 745, 67 P.2d 1093, the summons was served about 14 months after the action was commenced. The motion therein to dismiss, upon the ground of unreasonable delay in serving the summons, was granted. In that case it was said (p. 747, 67 P.2d p. 1094): 'The power of the court to dismiss for unreasonable delay in the service of summons is well settled. * * * A plaintiff's lack of diligence is not excused by the fact that other proceedings are pending * * * and delays for periods approximating that in the case at bar have been held sufficient to justify a dismissal. [Citations.]'