Tattenham v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Tattenham v. Superior Court

100 P. 248, 155 Cal. 205, 1909 Cal. LEXIS 414

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 16, 1909

DocketS.F. No. 5195.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 100 P. 248 (Tattenham v. Superior Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tattenham v. Superior Court, 100 P. 248, 155 Cal. 205, 1909 Cal. LEXIS 414 (Cal. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

This is a petition for the writ of certiorari. It is alleged that the petitioners have been enjoined in an action to which they were not parties, and therefore not subject to the jurisdiction of the court granting the injunction. If they can appeal it is conceded they have no right to the writ, and there is no doubt that they can appeal by making themselves parties in the manner pointed out in Elliott v. Superior Court, 144 Cal. 509, [103 Am. St. Rep. 102, 77 P. 1109].

Writ denied.

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

This is a petition for the writ of certiorari. It is alleged that the petitioners have been enjoined in an action to which they were not parties, and therefore not subject to the jurisdiction of the court granting the injunction. If they can appeal it is conceded they have no right to the writ, and there is no doubt that they can appeal by making themselves parties in the manner pointed out in Elliott v. Superior Court, 144 Cal. 509, [103 Am. St. Rep. 102, 77 P. 1109].

Writ denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 P. 248, 155 Cal. 205, 1909 Cal. LEXIS 414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tattenham-v-superior-court-cal-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack