Wissman

Wissman v. Cabaniss

Good Law
1917 Cal. App. LEXIS 60·34 Cal. App. 487·168 P. 150
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 27, 1917No. 2217.California397 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Petition for writ of mandate.

The court is of the opinion that this writ should issue. As to the effect of the decree in the former proceeding, we are of the opinion that it was entirely ineffectual to decide any property rights between the husband and wife by reason of the fact that the wife was not personally served with process. In that proceeding the court was without jurisdiction to determine the question of property rights in the absence of personal service. That being so, the wife had a right to bring the action out of which this proceeding arose, and she had the statutory right in preparing for the trial of that action to cause the deposition of the defendant to be taken. At the taking of that deposition she asked questions which were pertinent to the issues raised in the case and to be tried therein; she had a right to have those questions answered, and in ease the witness refused to answer she had a right to the direction of the superior court that the question should be answered. A refusal on the part of the superior court to exercise its power in aid of that right amounted to a denial of justice to her to the extent that it deprived her" of the statutory right which…

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.