City of Alameda v. Superior Court

Good Law
116 Cal. Rptr. 806·1974 Cal. App. LEXIS 1226·42 Cal. App. 3d 312
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 4, 1974Civ. 35267California2,121 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

An alternative writ of mandate was granted pursuant to the provisions of section 400 of the Code of Civil Procedure to review the action of the trial court in denying petitioner’s motion for a change of venue which was predicated upon the provisions of section 394 of that code. In support of the order it is contended that the provisions of the section leave the question of the proper place of trial to the discretion of the trial court when an action between two cities in the same county is involved. It is concluded that the provisions of the section require a change of venue, unless under the proviso in the section a disinterested judge is assigned to hear issues not triable by a jury.

The petitioner City of Alameda is one of the defendants in an action in the respondent court brought by the City of Oakland and other plaintiffs whereby a writ of mandate and injunctive relief is sought to prevent the building of new residential housing because of the operation and expansion of the Oakland Airport, Oakland, acting by and through its board of port commissioners, filed its complaint on May 23, 1974.

Real party in interest Harbor Bay Isle Associates is a joint venture…

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.