Phillips v. White
Before: McLucas
McLUCAS, P. J. Defendant appeals from an order made July 10, 1931, denying a motion for change of venue. The action was brought in the Justice’s Court of Santa Monica Township to recover the sum of $328.55 for services rendered and material furnished to the defendant, i The verified complaint alleges that the defendant is a resident of Santa Monica Township, that the obligation sued ,on was incurred in Santa Monica Township and that the [777]services were rendered and materials furnished within said township. The defendant was served with a copy of the complaint and summons in Santa Monica Township. The population of Santa Monica Township exceeds 30,000. Defendant filed demand for change of venue and filed a notice of motion for change of venue to the Municipal Court of the City of Los Angeles, on the ground that at the time of the commencement of the action, the defendant was and ever since said time has continued to he, and still is, a resident of La Crescenta Township, in the county of Los Angeles. In support of the motion, defendant filed his affidavit that he was a-resident of La Crescenta Township at all of said times. At the time of filing the notice of motion, defendant filed a demurrer, but did not file an answer as required by section 831 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The population of La Crescenta Township is less than 30,000 and consequently the justice’s court thereof would not have jurisdiction of the action, the demand being in excess of $300. In a proper case both the Justice’s Court of Santa Monica Township, the population of that .township being over 30,000 and the demand being less than $1,000 (sec. 112, Code Civ. Proc.) and the Los Angeles Municipal Court (Stats. 1929, p. 838) the demand being less than $2,000 dollars and the action arising within Los Angeles County, would have jurisdiction. The respondent relies upon the provisions of sections 832 and 833 of the Code of Civil Procedure, relating to the place of trial in justices’ courts. But these sections are not applicable to justices’ courts in townships having a population of 30,000 or more. Section 831h of the Code of Civil Procedure provides as follows:
“Civil actions in justices’ courts in cities, cities and counties, towns and judicial townships having a population of thirty thousand or more shall be commenced and prosecuted in the manner provided by law for the commencement and prosecution of civil actions in municipal courts of this state and the rules of pleading and practice applicable to the prosecution of civil actions and enforcement of judgments in the municipal courts of this state shall apply to and govern the prosecution and maintenance of civil actions and enforcement of judgments in said justices’ courts.”
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)