Bailey

This is an appeal from an order in a stockholders’ derivative action staying proceedings as to the first and second causes of action until 10 days after determination of a motion pursuant to Corporations Code section 834, subdivision (e), to require plaintiffs to furnish security as to the third cause of action.

The issues presented by this appeal should never arise again since they represent ramifications emanating from an appeal from an order that has since been held to be nonappealable. The original appeal, Bailey v. Fosca Oil Co., 180 Cal.App.2d 289 [ 4 Cal.Rptr. 474 ] (hearing denied by Supreme Court), was from an order denying defendants’ motion to require plaintiffs to furnish security in a stockholders’ derivative action (Corp. Code, § 834). Following that decision, such orders were held to be nonappealable by the case of Efron v. Kalmanovitz, 185 Cal.App.2d 149, 157 [ 8 Cal.Rptr. 107 ] (hearing denied by Supreme Court).

The first Bailey v. Fosca Oil Co. opinion, having been decided prior to Efron , became the law of this case, and the effect of that opinion was to disjoin the first and second causes of action from the third cause of action. This result was pointed out…