Benvenuto v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court Sep 25, 1919 No. L. A. No. 6292.Published

Before: THE COURT.

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court denied the application for a writ of prohibition because it would not anticipate the trial court's ruling on the pending sale confirmation and because the petitioner may have an adequate remedy by appeal.

Issues

Whether a writ of prohibition should be granted to prevent a trial court from acting on an application for confirmation of a sale.
Whether the petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal.

Disposition. Denied

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The application for a writ of prohibition is denied.”

“we cannot assume to anticipate the action of the trial court on the application for confirmation of the attempted sale referred to in the petition.”

“we are not satisfied that in the event of unfavorable action on the part of the lower court the petitioner's remedy by appeal would not be a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy.”

The application for a writ of prohibition is denied.

[1] We deem it proper to say that this denial is without reference to the merits of the legal question attempted to be presented by the application. Regardless of all other questions, we cannot assume to anticipate the action of the trial court on the application for confirmation of the attempted sale referred to in the petition.

It may further be suggested that we are not satisfied that in the event of unfavorable action on the part of the lower court the petitioner's remedy by appeal would not be a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy.

All the Justice concurred. *Page 294

Benvenuto v. Superior Court

AI Brief

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief