Jaynes v. Weickman
California Court of Appeal
APPLICATION for a Writ of Supersedeas, pending appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and Russ Avery, Judge thereof, to prevent punishment for contempt. Order to show cause discharged. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtFinlayson, P. J.
The appellants in this case have asked this court to grant a su-persedeas pending their appeal from the judgment. Pending the appeal, the superior court undertook to punish appellants for contempt of court. The alleged contempt consisted of appellants’ continued use of a certain trade name in violation of the terms of an injunction embodied in the judgment from which the appeal was taken. Appellants filed a petition for a writ of prohibition, but this court, being of the opinion that supersedeas, rather than prohibition, is the writ applicable to the case, made an order to show cause why the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Schwarz v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Merced Mining Co. v. FremontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Hulbert v. California Etc. Cement Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Wolf v. GallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Clute v. Superior Court of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1908
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Carolina Pines, Inc. v. Catalina PinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- People v. HillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Dry Cleaners & Dyers Institute v. ReissCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Youngblood v. WilcoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- Daly v. San Bernardino County Bd. of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2021