Wetzler
Wetzler v. Fitch
52 Cal. 638
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1878No. 5579California1,260 words
Opinion
lead Opinion
I. The Probate Court not being an inferior tribunal, the District Judge has no jurisdiction in the premises.. (Code Civil Procedure, secs. 98 and 1035 : Pond v. Pond, 10 Cal. 495 .)
II. “ Mandamus lies to compel an inferior tribunal to perform a duty enjoined by law, if it refuses to do so.” (Lewis v. Barclay, 35 Cal. 213 .) There is no law requiring the Probate Judge to set for hearing the account of a deceased executor. This point was settled in the case of Bush v. Lindsay, 44 Cal. 124 .
HI. K Julius Wetzler had a claim against Eosanna Keenan’s estate he should have presented it to the administrator of that estate. If it had been rejected by him, he had a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by suit in the proper Court. (Secs. 1493 to 1501, Code Civil Procedure.)