Scott v. Municipal Court

Opinion

THOMPSON, J.

In this appeal from an order of the superior court denying as untimely a petition for writ of review challenging a municipal court judgment of contempt, appellant contends that the superior court abused its discretion. We conclude that the action of the superior court finds support in appellant’s delay of approximately six months in seeking a writ of review. Accordingly, we affirm the order.

On November 1, 1972, appellant was found in contempt of the Municipal Court of the Citrus Judicial District and was sentenced to pay a $100 fine. On May 11, 1973, he filed a petition for writ of review with the Los Angeles Superior Court. That court denied the petition as “not timely filed.” This appeal followed.

In

Reynolds

v.

Superior Court,

64 Cal. 372 [28 P. 121], our Supreme Court said; “. . . [U]nless circumstances of an extraordinary character be shown to have intervened, the remedy through a writ of certiorari [review, Code of Civil Procedure section 1067] should be held to be barred by the lapse of the same length of time that bars an appeal from a final judgment.” (See also

Estate of Glassgold,

97 Cal.App.2d 859, 863-864 [218 P.2d 1016].) If the rule of

Reynolds

applies to the case at bench, appellant’s petition was untimely, having been filed well beyond the 60-day period of limitation for an appeal and no extraordinary circumstances having been alleged.

[997]

Citing

Conti

v.

Board of Civil Service Commissioners, 1

Cal.3d 351 [82 Cal.Rptr. 337, 461 P.2d 617], for the proposition that laches may not be established without a showing of prejudice and that passage of time bars a right to a prerogative writ only if laches is present, appellant argues that