Woodbury v. Nevada Southern Railway
This text of 53 P. 450 (Woodbury v. Nevada Southern Railway) 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.
Opinion
The Nevada Southern Railway Company, the defendant in the above-entitled action, made its application to the superior court for the substitution of M. W. Conkling as its attorney of record therein, in the place of A. B. Hotchkiss, and the court made its order for such substitution. From this order, and from a subsequent order refusing to set it aside, the present appeal has been taken.
'Whether the request for the substitution of attorneys that was presented to the superior court was made by the defendant was a question of fact for that court to determine, 'and its conclusion that it did make the request will not be reviewed here upon the suggestion of the displaced attorney that the court did not properly consider the evidence before it.
The right of a party to change his attorney of record is conferred by section 284 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and it is only necessary for it to prefer its request for such change in order to justify the court in making an order therefor. (Downer v. Norton, 16 Cal. 436; Lee v. Superior Court, 112 Cal. 354.)
The orders are affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
53 P. 450, 121 Cal. 165, 1898 Cal. LEXIS 869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodbury-v-nevada-southern-railway-cal-1898.