Nork

Nork v. Superior Court

Good Law
109 Cal. Rptr. 428·1973 Cal. App. LEXIS 957·33 Cal. App. 3d 997
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 17, 1973Civ. 14064California2,723 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thompson, J.

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate and/or prohibition to compel the Sacramento County Superior Court to enter an order granting petitioner’s motion for a bond or cash deposit pursuant to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 1029.6, subdivision (e). The said superior court had refused to make such an order, application having been made therefore. An order to show cause was issued by this court to the respondent court.

Petitioner contends (1) that section 1029.6, subdivision (e), is mandatory and that upon petitioner’s filing of the motion for an order requiring a bond or cash deposit the court must grant said motion, and (2) that if the court had any discretion it was abused in denying petitioner’s motion.

A summary of the proceedings leading up to our present controversy follows. Real party in interest (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff) filed his complaint for personal injuries against petitioner (hereinafter referred to as defendant) on November 17, 1972, alleging in substance that defendant’s conduct as a medical practitioner in operating on plaintiff without informing plaintiff of more conservative treatment available was wilful, malicious and…

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.