Ewell

Ewell v. Superior Court

Good Law
1924 Cal. App. LEXIS 258·69 Cal. App. 629·232 P. 153
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 15, 1924Civ. No. 5047.California1,192 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Langdon, J.

The petitioner seeks a writ of mandate to compel the superior court in and for the city and county of San Francisco to dismiss two actions pending there, wherein the petitioner is defendant and appears as his own attorney. Motions to dismiss these actions were heard by the superior court and denied.

It appears on the face of the petition that a stipulation was entered into in each action that the cause might be dropped from the trial calendar to be set by either party upon notice, “and laches on the .part of either party in bringing said action on for trial is hereby waived.” The actions were originally filed in July, 1916. They were numbered 75,129, 75,130. The former was tried in the superior court, and the judgment, later, set aside and a new trial granted. It was not retried, however, and an amended complaint was filed in 1919, substituting the trustees of the Banner Motion Picture Company, which had forfeited its charter, as plaintiffs therein. An answer to the amended complaint was filed. The other action was never tried, but answer had been filed therein. The stipulations hereinbefore referred to were entered into by the parties on June 6, 1919. Nothing further was done…

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.