Morrison

Holly Sugar Corp. v. Morrison

Good Law
103 Cal. App. 383·1930 Cal. App. LEXIS 843·283 P. 855
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 23, 1930Docket No. 75.California625 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Marks, J.

This proceeding was instituted in this court to compel respondent to receive and file a complaint in a civil action wherein petitioner here and plaintiff therein sought to recover judgment upon a promissory note. It was alleged in the complaint that there was the sum of $592.89 principal, $100 attorney’s fees and accrued interest due and unpaid thereon, in a total sum of less than $1,000. Petitioner further seeks to compel respondent to take jurisdiction of, to proceed with the hearing and disposition of said action on the ground that Santa Ana township had and still has a population in excess of 30,000. The answer of respondent admits all of the facts alleged in the petition except the population of the township.

Upon stipulation of the parties W. F. Menton was appointed referee to take evidence and determine the population of the township. On December 17, 1929, he. submitted his findings and report in which he found that the population of Santa Ana township was and now is in excess of 30,000.

On December 19, 1929, this court found that the population of Santa Ana township was in excess of 30,000 and ordered a peremptory writ of mandate to issue requiring respondent to file 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.