Legal Opinion

Gutierrez v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 28, 1966No. Civ. 23593PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMolinari, J.

In this mandamus proceeding the essential question for determination is whether the trial court could disregard the residence of a party who had been sued by a fictitious name, and whose true name was substituted after a motion to change venue, but before the hearing thereon. We •have concluded that the court below was required to consider the residence of such party in determining the motion for change of venue, and that since the residence of such defendant was established to' be in San Francisco County, the trial court erred in ordering a change of venue to Ventura County. In reaching this…

2Cases cited58 opinions

  1. Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Austin v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Hale v. BohannonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Brady v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1895

53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Barth v. B. F. Goodrich Tire Co.California Court of Appeal · 1968
  2. Star Motor Imports, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  3. Sheard v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  4. Johnson v. Standard Brands Paint Co.California Court of Appeal · 1969
  5. Moore v. PowellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API