Legal Opinion
366-388 Geary Street, L.P. v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 26, 1990No. A046396PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BENSON, J.
Petitioner 366-386 Geary Street, L. P., seeks a writ of mandate and/or prohibition directing respondent superior court to vacate a preliminary injunction it granted to real parties Monro, Thrasher, and Abrahamson (MTA). That injunction prevents petitioner from removing or altering trade fixtures at Rosebud’s English Pub (Rosebud’s) in San Francisco. Petitioner also seeks an appropriate writ prohibiting further proceedings in the superior court on real parties’ petition for relief from forfeiture of Rosebud’s lease, brought under Code of Civil Procedure section 1179.
We grant…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Ernst v. SearleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- In Re Windmill Farms, Inc., Debtor. Vanderpark Properties, Inc. v. David L. Buchbinder, Trustee of Windmill Farms Management Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Levy v. CohenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Redlands High School District v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Lacey v. BertoneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- DIAL 800 v. FesbinderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Sparks Construction, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
- Palmer v. ShawbackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
- Vallely Investments, L.P. v. BancAmerica Commercial Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Syufy Enterprises v. City of OaklandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.