Conniff

Conniff v. Superior Court

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 73·90 Cal. App. 169·265 P. 555
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 16, 1928Docket No. 6363.California2,159 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Nourse, J.

This is an original application for a writ of prohibition to restrain the respondent Superior Court from enforcing an order made in that court January 30, 1928, in the action entitled Calhoma Oil Corporation et al. v. James E. Conniff et al. The order complained of was an order made after final judgment fixing the amount of stay bond on the appeal from the judgment staying execution of the judgment and restoring the plaintiffs therein to the possession of the real property in suit for the purpose of maintaining the status quo as it existed at the time of the entry of the judgment.

The petitioners herein were the owners of certain real property situated in Alameda County which they leased to the Calhoma Oil Corporation by written lease dated March 19, 1925, for the period of five years for the purpose of mining and drilling for oil and gas. The lease contained the usual stipulations requiring diligent prosecution of drilling operations but provided that where such operations were delayed a fixed rental might be paid by the lessee during the period of delay. It did not contain any specific provision reserving to the lessors the right to claim a forfeiture or the right of re-entry…

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.