Peck v. Municipal Court

California Court of Appeal

Peck v. Municipal Court

127 P.2d 668, 53 Cal. App. 2d 267, 1942 Cal. App. LEXIS 472

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJuly 6, 1942

DocketCiv. No. 12187

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 127 P.2d 668 (Peck v. Municipal Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Peck v. Municipal Court, 127 P.2d 668, 53 Cal. App. 2d 267, 1942 Cal. App. LEXIS 472 (Cal. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

NOURSE, P. J.

An alternative writ of prohibition was issued to restrain further proceedings under an ex parte order appointing a receiver in an action to dissolve a partnership pending in the municipal court. The alternative writ was issued and heard upon the authority of A. G. Col Co. v. Superior Court, 196 Cal. 604 [238 Pac. 926] ; Evans v. Superior Court, 14 Cal. (2d) 563 [96 P. (2d) 107], and similar cases holding that prohibition was an appropriate remedy where the order was in excess of the court’s jurisdiction, though a remedy by appeal was provided by statute. The question whether an appeal is “a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy” is one to be determined on the facts and circumstances of each case. The petitioner has failed to show that his right of appeal to the superior court is not such a remedy.

Por these reasons the petition is denied and the alternative writ is discharged.

Sturtevant, J., concurred.

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

NOURSE, P. J.

An alternative writ of prohibition was issued to restrain further proceedings under an ex parte order appointing a receiver in an action to dissolve a partnership pending in the municipal court. The alternative writ was issued and heard upon the authority of A. G. Col Co. v. Superior Court, 196 Cal. 604 [238 Pac. 926] ; Evans v. Superior Court, 14 Cal. (2d) 563 [96 P. (2d) 107], and similar cases holding that prohibition was an appropriate remedy where the order was in excess of the court’s jurisdiction, though a remedy by appeal was provided by statute. The question whether an appeal is “a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy” is one to be determined on the facts and circumstances of each case. The petitioner has failed to show that his right of appeal to the superior court is not such a remedy.

Por these reasons the petition is denied and the alternative writ is discharged.

Sturtevant, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 P.2d 668, 53 Cal. App. 2d 267, 1942 Cal. App. LEXIS 472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peck-v-municipal-court-calctapp-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack