Goodwin v. Glazer

California Supreme Court

Goodwin v. Glazer

10 Cal. 333

California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1858·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, J., and Baldwin, J., concurring.

The mandamus in this case was improperly granted. Plaintiff had recovered a moneyed judgment, upon which the clerk of [334] the Court refused to issue execution. For all damages resulting from this refusal, the plaintiff has, in ordinary course of law, a plain and adequate remedy, by an action on the bond of the officer, and it is well settled that the writ will not issue in such cases.

Judgment reversed.

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

Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, J., and Baldwin, J., concurring.

The mandamus in this case was improperly granted. Plaintiff had recovered a moneyed judgment, upon which the clerk of [334] the Court refused to issue execution. For all damages resulting from this refusal, the plaintiff has, in ordinary course of law, a plain and adequate remedy, by an action on the bond of the officer, and it is well settled that the writ will not issue in such cases.

Judgment reversed.

Goodwin v. Glazer, 10 Cal. 333 (Cal. 1858).

Pincite

10 Cal. 333 (Goodwin v. Glazer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related