Rundberg

Rundberg v. Belcher

Good Law
118 Cal. 589·1897 Cal. LEXIS 814·50 P. 670
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 9, 1897S. F. No. 963California641 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fleet, J.

Application for mandate to require respondent, as judge of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, to make an order of substitution of .attorneys in a cause pending before him.

The petition does not state facts authorizing the granting of the writ. The only material statements in the petition after the jurisdictional facts are, that on the twenty-fifth day of March, 1897, petitioner, desiring to change her attorneys in the cause pending in the superior court, employed other attorneys to represent her, “and upon, her affidavit duly made and filed in said cause, in said superior court, and upon service of a notice of motion, with a copy of the above-mentioned affidavit attached thereto, duly served upon her former attorney, F. J. Fallon, Esquire, for a substitution of counsel for plaintiff in said cause; said motion, after several continuances, came on regularly for hearing on the fourteenth day of May, 1897, before defendant”; and that after a hearing the said motion was denied.

While mandate will lie to compel judicial action, and in some instances even specific action (Wood v. Strother, 76 Cal. 545 , 9 Am. St. Rep. 249 ) and is an appropriate remedy in a…

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.