Holbrook

Holbrook v. Board of Education

Good Law
113 Cal. App. 2d 840·1952 Cal. App. LEXIS 1458·249 P.2d 29
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 27, 1952Civ. 15253California706 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wood, J.

In this proceeding in mandamus plaintiff upon his former appeal ( 37 Cal.2d 316 [ 231 P.2d 853 ]) was successful in establishing his acquisition of the status of a full time permanent employee (a classroom teacher of the defendant school district) and that the district board had exceeded its authority in purporting to reduce him to the status of a part time permanent employee.

After the remittitur went down following the decision upon the former appeal, plaintiff filed a memorandum of costs in the court below including an item of $5,000 for attorney’s fees. The defendants moved and the trial court ordered that item stricken from the bill. From that order plaintiff has appealed.

Plaintiff does not claim that the law governing mandamus proceedings accords him attorney’s fees as costs, nor could he do so successfully. The applicable title of the Code of Civil Procedure embraces sections 1067 to 1110b. Sec tion 1109 adopts the provisions of part two, sections 307 to 1059, as the rules of practice in mandamus proceedings except as otherwise provided in that title. Section 1095 of that title recognizes costs but is silent concerning the elements thereof. Accordingly, section 1021

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.