Haase v. Gibson

[260]

THE COURT.

This case is companion to

Haase

v.

Gibson,

No. 24076,

ante,

page 256 [3 Cal.Rptr. 806]. The instant appeal is, similarly, from a judgment of dismissal following an order sustaining a general demurrer to appellant’s complaint without leave to amend.

The action in the case at bar seeks an award of damages for “misfeasance” against the Honorable Phil S. Gibson, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of California; the Honorable Gilbert Perry, the trial judge who ordered the judgment of nonsuit in the ease of

Haase

v. Cardoza; Mr. Justice Pro Tempore Warne, author of the opinion of the appellate court affirming said judgment of nonsuit

(Haase

v.

Cardoza,

165 Cal.App.2d 35 [331 P.2d 419]); and certain other individuals, including Alice I. Cardoza, respondent on the former appeal.

The complaint alleges that “for the purpose of covering up and concealing lack of grasp of both the law and the facts in

[Haase

v. Cardoza] and his distortion of both . . . the trial judge Superior Judge Gilbert B. Perry caused the doctoring of the reporter’s transcript to manufacture a jurisdiction which he did not and could not have or possess.” The “doctoring” complained of was the insertion of a statement to the effect that defendant’s motion for nonsuit was granted “pursuant to Section 1606 of the Code of Civil Procedure.” The complaint further alleges that the Chief Justice “acting without warrant of law and in manner Caesaristic did transfer plaintiff’s appeal from said judgment from the First Appellate District where it legally belonged to the Third Appellate District where it did not legally belong” and “hand picked” Justice Pro Tern. Warne who, by his opinion on appeal, did “fish out, sustain and rescue Superior Court Judge Gilbert B. Perry in and from his tortious and jurisdietionless acts.”