Goldwater v. Superior Court CA4/1
Filed 11/25/24 Goldwater v. Superior Court CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
JASON GOLDWATER, D085139
Petitioner, (San Diego County Super. Ct. No. 24HR021534C) v.
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY,
Respondent;
RAPHAEL FRANCISCO MENA,
Real Party in Interest.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING in mandate. Timothy B. Taylor, Judge. Petition granted. Jason Goldwater, self-represented petitioner. David R. Loeffler, Loeffler Law, for real party in interest. Petitioner Jason Goldwater seeks a writ of mandate compelling the trial court to vacate its order denying his request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and to enter a new order granting a TRO. We issued an
alternative writ and informed the parties that if the respondent court did not reconsider its ruling, we would consider issuing a peremptory writ in the first instance (Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 178– 180.) Goldwater has now informed this court that the respondent court has not granted the requested relief. Accordingly, we grant the petition and will issue a peremptory writ directing the respondent court to vacate its prior order and enter a new order granting Goldwater’s request for a TRO. BACKGROUND Goldwater’s writ petition arises from dueling requests for civil harassment restraining orders by two neighbors following a physical altercation. Goldwater lives in a condominium complex in Hillcrest with his two dogs. According to Goldwater, he was in a common area with his dogs when one wandered onto his neighbor’s patio. The neighbor’s boyfriend, Raphael Mena, was outside and Goldwater heard Mena attacking the dog. Goldwater and Mena have a history of confrontation, including a prior incident where both parties sought restraining orders against each other. Goldwater claims he went onto the neighbor’s patio to defend his dog, resulting in a physical fight between Goldwater and Mena. Goldwater states he was attacked by Mena, who would have “murdered” him by strangling him with a dog leash if two neighbors did not intervene to save him. Goldwater admits, however, that when the police responded, they arrested him and not Mena. Goldwater states he has since been informed that the District Attorney will not be pursuing charges against him. In an informal response to the petition, Mena denies Goldwater’s version of events. He claims Goldwater was the aggressor and asserts he will be able to prove the actual version of the altercation at an evidentiary
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)