Benjamin Franklin B. I. Corp. v. Schmidt

California Court of Appeal

Benjamin Franklin B. I. Corp. v. Schmidt

22 P.2d 26, 132 Cal. App. 39, 1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 240

California Court of Appeal·Decided May 16, 1933·No. Docket No. 8881.·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

[1] The writ of review was improperly issued in this proceeding. After return made to the writ our attention is first called in the briefs to the fact that the petition for the writ was unverified. The writ of review can be issued only upon a verified petition. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1069.)

[2] As we have so often said under similar circumstances, respondent judge is not a proper party to the proceeding.

The writ and the accompanying restraining order are set aside and the proceeding is dismissed.

Stephens, J., and Parker, J., pro tem., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[1] The writ of review was improperly issued in this proceeding. After return made to the writ our attention is first called in the briefs to the fact that the petition for the writ was unverified. The writ of review can be issued only upon a verified petition. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1069.)

[2] As we have so often said under similar circumstances, respondent judge is not a proper party to the proceeding.

The writ and the accompanying restraining order are set aside and the proceeding is dismissed.

Stephens, J., and Parker, J., pro tem., concurred.

Benjamin Franklin B. I. Corp. v. Schmidt, 22 P.2d 26, 132 Cal. App. 39, 1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 240 (Cal. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

22 P.2d 26 (Benjamin Franklin B. I. Corp. v. Schmidt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related