Tate

Tate v. Superior Court

Bad Law
119 Cal. Rptr. 835·1975 Cal. App. LEXIS 1740·45 Cal. App. 3d 925
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 12, 1975Civ. 35894California1,638 words

Opinion

Opinion

Molinari, J.

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate directing respondent court to set aside its dismissal of an action for damages for personal injuries. An alternative writ was issued by this court.

The complaint was filed on August 9, 1972. Real party in interest answered the complaint on August 24, 1972. Petitioner filed a memorandum on August 31, 1972, that the case was at issue, pursuant to rule 206 of the California Rules of Court. Although a notice of eligibility to file a certificate of readiness was served on petitioner in December 1973, none was filed. On September 4, 1974, the clerk of respondent court mailed a notice to petitioner and real party that on September 18, 1974, a hearing would be held at which petitioner would be required to show cause why respondent court should not, on its own motion, enter its order dismissing the action. On September 18, 1974, a hearing was held and the action was ordered dismissed.

Petitioner contends that the dismissal of his action by respondent court was improper due to the court’s failure to follow the procedure prescribed in subdivision (a) of section 583 of the Code of Civil Procedure and rule 203.5 of the California Rules of Court…

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.