French Art Cleaners v. State Board of Dry Cleaners

DOOLING, J.

This is an application for a writ of supersedeas to stay the operation of a temporary injunction pending the determination of the defendant’s appeal.

It appears from the record that acting pursuant to sections 9563-9566 of the Business and Professions Code (Stats. 1945, pp. 2847-8) the defendant and appellant State Board of Dry Cleaners established a minimum price scale for the services

[46]

to be charged by cleaning establishments operating in Alameda County, effective on and after January 14, 1948. The plaintiff, which operates a dry cleaning plant in Alameda County, on February 9, 1948 filed its complaint seeking to enjoin the enforcement of this schedule of prices and the order granting a temporary injunction was made and entered on May 18.

That this court has the power to stay the operation of a prohibitory injunction is settled by

Food & Grocery Bureau

v.

Garfield,

18 Cal.2d 174, 177 [114 P.2d 579], That case presented the converse of this. There an injunction had been issued by the trial court restraining the defendant from issuing trading stamps to its customers on the ground that the enjoined practices violated the Unfair Practices Act. The court issued the writ of supersedeas. At pages 177-178 the court said:

“The sole question then is whether the showing made by petitioner is such as will justify this court in exercising its inherent power in his behalf. We think that it is. This conclusion is not based upon a balancing of conveniences or hardships, which is not the proper test

(Hulbert

v.

California etc. Cement Co.,

161 Cal. 239 [118 P. 928, 38 L.R.A. N.S. 436] ;

Ohaver

v.

Fenech, supra