Taliaferro

Taliaferro v. Coakley

Good Law
186 Cal. App. 2d 258·1960 Cal. App. LEXIS 1625·9 Cal. Rptr. 529
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 10, 1960Civ. 18892California1,146 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bray, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of defendant Coakley after order granting motion for summary judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Will summary judgment apply in a mandamus proceeding?

2. Will summary judgment lie when no answer is filed?

3. Effect of failure to file counteraffidavit.

4. Failure to file points and authorities on motion.

Record

Plaintiff as a taxpayer sued defendant Coakley, the Judge of the. Superior Court of Mariposa County (who presided pro tem. in the Superior Court of Contra Costa County in actions in which plaintiff was involved), the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, the County Treasurer, the District Attorney, the Controller of the State of California and the Attorney General. The gist of his action is that defendant Coakley wrongfully received payments of travel expenses and salary, for which plaintiff prays judgment, and also asks that a writ of mandate issue ordering the other defendants to investigate and bring suit and take other proceedings for the recovery of said payments. Defendant Coakley, without answering, filed a motion for summary judgment, filing an affidavit in support thereof. Plaintiff filed no counter-affidavit.…

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.