Simpson

Simpson v. Superior Court

Good Law
111 Cal. Rptr. 2d 819
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 20, 2001BS069127California1,126 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKAY, J.

Due to the procedural nature of this petition, this court finds the petition meritorious, but no writ of mandate need be issued. The response filed in this case is ordered stricken.

Petitioner Artice Simpson (hereinafter petitioner) filed a petition for writ of mandate directing respondent, the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, to vacate its order denying petitioner's application for waiver of court fees and costs, made pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 985. By order dated May 11, 2001, the parties were notified that this court may elect to issue the peremptory writ in the first instance in this matter and invited response thereto by real party in interest pursuant to Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 177-183 , 203 Cal.Rptr. 626 , 681 P.2d 893 .

Thereafter, two unusual events occurred. First, respondent court on its own ordered petitioner be given a refund of her first appearance fee, and respondent court delivered a copy of said order to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Thereafter, on May 29, 2001, the trial court judge, Judge Brett C. Klein, filed his own response to the petition in the…

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.