County of Los Angeles v. Nesvig

California Court of Appeal Jan 7, 1965 No. Civ. 28698Published

Before: Fleming

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court denied the petition for a writ of mandate on the grounds that the petitioners failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying the bypass of the superior court's original jurisdiction.

Issues

Whether an appellate court should exercise original jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandate to compel a public official to perform a ministerial act when the matter could be heard in superior court.

Disposition. Denied without prejudice.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It was never intended that such applications should be filed in an appellate court unless there was some good reason why it should not be filed in the superior court”

“Orderly judicial administration likewise demands that petitions for writs of mandate be presented in the first instance to courts of original jurisdiction.”

“Exceptional circumstances not having been shown, the alternative writ is discharged and the writ of mandate denied, without prejudice to the right of petitioners to refile in the superior court.”

FLEMING, J.

Original proceeding for writ of mandate. Petitioners seek to compel the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles to publish a notice, pursuant to Government Code, section 25351.3, subdivision (c), inviting bids on a lease theretofore authorized by the board of supervisors.

The proposed transaction consists essentially of a lease

[601]

and lease-back of county property which will serve as a financing device for the construction of the Los Angeles County-Hollywood Museum. The lease, lease-back arrangement will operate in the following manner:

The county is the owner of real property across from the Hollywood Bowl on which the Los Angeles County-Hollywood Museum is to be built. Petitioner Hollywood Museum Lease Corporation is a nonprofit corporation organized to provide facilities for a motion picture and television museum. Pursuant to Government Code, sections 25351.3, 25351.4 and 25371, under a lease and lease-back contract the county will lease this property for $1.00 to the successful bidder (presumably but not necessarily Hollywood Museum Lease Corporation) , who will then build the Los Angeles County-Hollywood Museum in accordance with plans and specifications drafted and approved by the county, and on completion of construction lease back the property to the county for 30 years at a rental to be determined by the bidding. At the end of the lease period title to the museum will vest in the county.

The completed museum will not be operated by the county but rather by petitioner Hollywood Museum, another nonprofit corporation, with whom the county has entered a contract covering the management and operation of the museum for a period of 40 years, subject to specified controls retained by the county.

Petitioners contend that an original petition for mandate in this court is proper for two reasons: (a) The suit raises an important question of public law, whether the lease, leaseback method of financing is available for the construction of such nonmandatory public facilities as motion picture and television museums; (b) speed of decision is essential in that county property is lying idle and county funds are being expended without return of revenue.

County of Los Angeles v. Nesvig

AI Brief

FLEMING, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief