Majority
Claiming that the defendants, as the Civil Service Commission of San Francisco, had marked his papers incorrectly, the plaintiff commenced a proceeding in mandamus to compel the defendant commission to re-mark his papers. On December 9, 1931, E. A. Hahn, C. A. Spuur and A. J. Canty were given permission to intervene. As the record before us does not show to the contrary, we assume that the application was made ex parte. On December 10, 1931, the trial court made an order denying the application to intervene. Whether that order was made on notice or was made ex parte is immaterial. As the application was granted ex parte it could be set aside ex parte. (Coburn v. Pacific L. & M. Co., 46 Cal. 31 , 33.) If it could be entirely set aside it could be entirely ignored, and from the record before us we assume that it was entirely ignored. The defendant commission answered the plaintiff’s complaint and a trial was had. On May 18, 1932, the trial court entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants. On May 27, 1932, E. A. Hahn,
The appeal is dismissed.
Nourse, P. J., and Spence, J., concurred.
Cases cited
- Coburn v. Pacific Lumber & Mill Co. 46 Cal. 31 at 33 p. 765
- Dollenmayer v. Pryor 150 Cal. 1 p. 766
- Thorpe v. North Moneta Garden Lands Water Co. 12 Cal. App. 186 p. 766
- Stern & Goodman Investment Co. v. Danziger 206 Cal. 456 at 459 p. 766