Wollenshlager v. Riegel

California Supreme Court Aug 4, 1921 No. L. A. No. 7009.Published

Before: THE COURT.

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court denied a petition for a supersedeas because granting it would effectively constitute an exercise of original jurisdiction to issue an injunction, which the court lacks the power to do.

Issues

Whether the court has the power to grant a supersedeas that would function as an injunction to stay an execution sale after the lower court refused to grant such an injunction.

Disposition. Denied

The petition of appellants for a supersedeas shows that the action in the court below was to procure an injunction to stay an execution sale. The injunction was refused. Appellants ask asupersedeas to stay the execution which they sought to have enjoined in the court below. The effect would be that this court would grant the injunction which the court below refused to grant. [1] It is well established that this court is without power to exercise *Page 623 original jurisdiction of this character. (Napa etc. Co. v.Calistoga etc. Co., 174 Cal. 411, [163 P. 497]; Hicks v.Michael, 15 Cal. 109.)

The application for a supersedeas is denied.

Wollenshlager v. Riegel

AI Brief

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief