McCue v. Superior Court
JAMES S. McCUE v. SUPERIOR COURT OF MARIN COUNTY
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Thomas B. McFarland (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
The Court.
The writ must be dismissed. The writ will not lie where there is an appeal, and if there is an appeal, but the time for taking it has elapsed, the writ . will not lie. (In re Stuttmeister, ante, p. 322; Miliken v. Huber, 21 Cal. 166; Bennett v. Wallace, 43 Cal. 25.)
Writ dismissed.
McFarland, J., concurring.
I concur in the judgment; but in my opinion there might be a case where, on account of unusual circumstances, a writ of review' would lie although there had been, at one time, a right of appeal, — as intimated in Kimple v. Superior Court of San Francisco, 55 Cal. 136.
Cites, in this corpus
- Ames v. Eldred No. 6,552 · 1880-07-01
- Bennett v. Wallace No. 3,081 · 1872-01-15
- Miliken v. Huber · 1862-07-01
Cited by
- Simmons v. Superior Court L. A. 25320 · 1959-06-24
- State Board of Equalization v. Superior Court S. F. 15845 · 1937-07-14
- Associated Credit Exchange v. Barnett Docket No. 5881. · 1927-08-26
- Maidenberg v. Justice's Court Civ. No. 1864. · 1917-02-02
- Hall v. Justice's Court Civ. No. 269. · 1907-03-01