Wright v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
PROHIBITION to the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. W. G. Lorigan, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1DissentShaw, J.
The proceeding is for prohibition. By the terms of the statute the writ cannot issue unless the court below is acting without jurisdiction. This is the controlling factor in the ease. A failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, or, in other words, to state facts which show that the plaintiff has a right of action, must not be confused with a lack of jurisdiction. The first proposition has no bearing at all on the decision of the ease, while the latter is essential to the decision of the majority of the court. And yet the decision is based on the first proposition…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Post & Co. v. Toledo, Cincinnati, & St. Louis RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- People ex rel. Teschemacher v. DavidsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Rosenberg v. FrankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Spreckels v. Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Handley v. HeflinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.