Kozminsky

Kozminsky v. Williams

Good Law
126 Cal. 26·1899 Cal. LEXIS 669·58 P. 310
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 8, 1899S.F. No. 1457.California923 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Beatty, J.

—The defendant is justices’ court clerk of the city and county of San Francisco, and he prosecutes this appeal from a judgment of the superior court awarding a writ of mandate commanding him to file an affidavit and undertaking on attachment and to issue the proper writ.

The controversy arises out of the fact that the defendant demanded^ the payment of certain fees as a condition of filing the papers and issuing the writ, which the plaintiff contends (and the superior court has found) he was not required to pay. The case is governed by the act of March 28, 1895, establishing the fees of certain officers, including justices of the peace. (Stats. 1895, p. 272.) It is therein provided that justices of the peace may collect the following fees, and no others: “Each justice of the peace shall be allowed, in a civil action before him, for all services to be performed by Mm before trial, two dollars; and for the trial and all proceedings subsequent thereto, including all affidavits, swearing witnesses and jury, and the entry of judgment and issue of execution thereon, three dollars; and in all cases where judgment is rendered by default or confession, for all services, including…

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.