(533 P.2d 501)
No. 74-181Colorado Court of Appeals.
Decided March 11, 1975.
Appellant sought review of an order of the trial court which quashed service of summons purportedly effected under “long arm” statute.
Appeal Dismissed
1. APPEAL AND ERROR — Trial Court Order — Quash — Service of Summons — Not — Appealable Order. An order of the trial court which quashed service of summons purportedly effected under the Colorado “long arm” statute is not an appealable order within the provisions of the appellate rules.
Appeal from the District Court of the City and County of Denver, Honorable Edward J. Byrne.
Howard Kenison, for plaintiff-appellant.
Yegge, Hall Evans, Paul D. Cooper, for defendant-appellee.
Division II.
Opinion by JUDGE PIERCE.
This case comes before us for review of an order of the trial court which
Page 372
quashed service of summons purportedly effected under the Colorado “long arm” statute. Section 13-1-124, C.R.S. 1973.
[1] The issue before us is very narrow. Do we have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal? The answer is no. While this action might be properly raised in an original proceeding before the Supreme Court, see Hoen v. District Court, 159 Colo. 451, 412 P.2d 428; Alliance Clothing Ltd. v. District Court, 187 Colo. 400, 532 P.2d 351, it is not an appealable order within the provisions of C.A.R. 1(a). Hoen v. District Court, supra. This ruling disposes of all other issues presented to us in the briefs of the parties, and we therefore dismiss this appeal.Appeal dismissed.
JUDGE ENOCH and JUDGE RULAND concur.