Martinez v. Super. Ct. CA4/2

California Court of Appeal Jan 28, 2015 No. E062435Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court erred in denying the petitioners' request to stay the unlawful detainer action, as the equities favored the petitioners and the court has discretion to stay such actions when title issues are raised in related cases.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in refusing to stay an unlawful detainer action pending the resolution of related title litigation.

Disposition. Granted

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“where title issues are raised in a related case (or cases), the unlawful detainer court may exercise its discretion to stay that action pending resolution of the civil action or actions.”

“we have determined that the trial court erred in refusing petitioners’ request for stay, and that the petition should be granted.”

Filed 1/28/15 Martinez v. Super. Ct. CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

JUAN A. MARTINEZ et al.,

Petitioners, E062435

v. (Super.Ct.No. UDFS1407460)

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF OPINION SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY,

Respondent;

NADAVON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS, LLC,

Real Party in Interest.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for writ of mandate. Lily L. Sinfield,

Judge. Petition is granted.

Simoneaux Law Firm and Maggie R. Simoneaux-Cuaso, for Petitioners.

No appearance for Respondent.

Ritchie, Klinkert & McCallion, Thomas B. Ritchie, James E. Klinkert, and Paul J.

Gutierrez, for Real Party in Interest.

In this matter we have reviewed the petition and the opposition filed by real party

in interest. We have determined that resolution of the matter involves the application of

settled principles of law, and that the equities favor petitioners. We conclude that

issuance of a peremptory writ in the first instance is therefore appropriate. (Palma v. U.S.

Martinez v. Super. Ct. CA4/2

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF OPINION SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY,

NADAVON REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS, LLC,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

KING J.

MILLER J.

AI Brief