Larue v. Gaskins
Before: Murray
Synopsis
The plaintiff commenced an action of forcible entry and detainer against the defendant, in a Justice’s Court. The Justice, instead of trying the case, certified it to the District Court. Held, that the transfer was illegal, and could not defeat the plaintiff’s rights by operating a discontinuance.
Where a Justice is interested in the event of a suit, the statute requires that he should transfer the case before another Justice.
Murray, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Heydenfeldt, J., concurred.
The transfer of the cause from the Justice’s to the District Court, was illegal, and cannot defeat the plaintiff’s rights by operating a dis? continuance.
After the decision of this Court, the case stood on the docket .as if no transfer had ever been made, and it was his duty to proceed and try it. Being disqualified by the statute, he should have transferred it.
Thé Court below is directed to issue a peremptory mandamus.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)