Peck v. Superior Court
JAMES F. PECK v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF COLUSA COUNTY
- Area
- civil
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 application of the above-named petitioner for a writ of prohibition is hereby denied upon the authority of section 14 of article I of the Constitution, and the cases of Marblehead Land Co. v. Superior Court, 62 Cal. App. 408 [217 Pac. 536], and Stone v. Cordua Irr. Dist., 72 Cal. App. 331 [237 Pac. 554], In the Marblehead Land Company case it was held that the court might fix the amount of the security upon an ex parte showing, and that such proceeding did not violate the fourteenth amendment of the federal Constitution.
In the Stone case it was held by this court that section 14 of article I does not violate any of the provisions of the federal Constitution in providing for the immediate taking of possession of property upon giving security -in the way of making deposits to cover damages in such sum as the court might determine. (See list of cases cited on page 337 of volume 72, supra.)
Cites, in this corpus
- Stone v. Cordua Irrigation District Docket No. 2881. · 1925-04-17
- Marblehead Land Co. v. Superior Court Civ. Nos. 4345, 4346. · 1923-06-06
Cited by
- City of Los Angeles v. Decker Civ. 46477 · 1976-08-23