Wollenshlager v. Riegel

California Supreme Court

Wollenshlager v. Riegel

200 P. 726, 186 Cal. 622, 1921 Cal. LEXIS 486

California Supreme Court·Decided August 4, 1921·No. L. A. No. 7009.·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

The petition of appellants for a supersedeas shows that the action in the court below was to procure an injunction to stay an execution sale. The injunction was refused. Appellants ask asupersedeas to stay the execution which they sought to have enjoined in the court below. The effect would be that this court would grant the injunction which the court below refused to grant. [1] It is well established that this court is without power to exercise *Page 623 original jurisdiction of this character. (Napa etc. Co. v.Calistoga etc. Co., 174 Cal. 411, [163 P. 497]; Hicks v.Michael, 15 Cal. 109.)

The application for a supersedeas is denied.

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

The petition of appellants for a supersedeas shows that the action in the court below was to procure an injunction to stay an execution sale. The injunction was refused. Appellants ask asupersedeas to stay the execution which they sought to have enjoined in the court below. The effect would be that this court would grant the injunction which the court below refused to grant. [1] It is well established that this court is without power to exercise *Page 623 original jurisdiction of this character. (Napa etc. Co. v.Calistoga etc. Co., 174 Cal. 411, [163 P. 497]; Hicks v.Michael, 15 Cal. 109.)

The application for a supersedeas is denied.

Wollenshlager v. Riegel, 200 P. 726, 186 Cal. 622, 1921 Cal. LEXIS 486 (Cal. 1921).

Pincite

200 P. 726 (Wollenshlager v. Riegel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related