Hall

DISCUSSION

Appellant contends, “The trial court erroneously held that it lacked the power . . . to issue a writ of mandate against itself, citing the incorrect proposition that a writ of mandate may only be issued to an inferior tribunal.” We disagree. We review this legal issue de novo. (Earnest v. Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 62, 73.) Code of Civil Procedure section 1085, subdivision (a) states: “A writ of mandate may be issued by any court to any inferior tribunal, corporation, board, or person, to compel the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins . . . and from which the party is unlawfully precluded by that inferior tribunal, corporation, board, or person.” (Italics added.) The statute’s plain language permits a court to issue a writ only to an “inferior tribunal,” necessarily disallowing a superior court from issuing a writ against itself. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1085, subd. (a); see Legg v. Superior Court (1958) 156 Cal.App.2d 723, 725 [“Obviously a petition for mandamus directed by the [s]uperior [c]ourt to itself will not lie”]; People v. Davis (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1353, 1371 [“The superior court does not have the authority or…