Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Broder v. Superior Court 103 Cal. 124

← Cases

Broder v. Superior Court

103 Cal. 124 Court Cal. Decision date 1894-06-15 Docket No. 15512 English

Delivered by Harrison, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 124
[No. 15512.
In Bank.
June 15, 1894.]
R. C. BRODER et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MONO COUNTY and W. H. VIRDEN, Judge, Respondent.

Headnote

Trial—Interlocutory Judgment—Findings—Jurisdiction to Set Cause —Prohibition—Remedy by Appeal.—The superior court has jurisdiction to deny a motion to enter an interlocutory judgment upon findings that have been filed, and to grant a motion of the defendants to fix a day for the trial of the cause, and a writ of prohibition will not lie' to restrain the court from proceeding in such trial; but the plaintiffs have a complete and perfect remedy by appeal from the judgment that may be rendered therein.
Application for a writ of prohibition to the Superior Court of Mono County.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Richard J. Miner, for Petitioners.
P. Reddy, and W. H. Metson, for Respondent.

This is an application for a writ of prohibition, and is the counterpart of a proceeding between the same parties, No. 15513, this day decided (ante, p. 121).

At the same time that the superior court denied the petitioners’ motion to enter judgment upon the findings that had been filed therein, it granted a motion of the defendants, and fixed a day for the trial of the cause in accordance with its previous order of May 13th. Thereupon the plaintiffs made application here for a writ of prohibition restraining the superior court from proceeding in the trial of the cause.

That application must be denied, for the reason that the order of the court was made in a cause then pending before it in which it had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties thereto, and which had not been fully tried. If the court committed any error in making the order, or should commit any error in its further proceedings during the trial of the cause,- the plaintiffs

p. 125
have a complete and perfect remedy by an appeal from the judgment that may be rendered therein.

The application for the writ is denied.

McFarland, J., Garoutte, J., and Fitzgerald, J., concurred.