Legal Opinion

Johnston v. St. Sure

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 30, 1920No. Civ. No. 3690PublishedCited by 14 opinions

PROCEEDING in Mandamus to compel A. F. St. Sure, as Judge of the Superior Court of Alameda County, to direct a wife to answer questions propounded to her in the taking of her deposition. Writ issued. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtNourse, J.

This is an original proceeding in mandamus to require the respondent, as judge of the superior court, to direct Carrie E. Bridge to answer questions propounded to her in the taking of her deposition in a proceeding pending in that court. The sole question at issue is whether the said witness, being jointly sued with her husband as' a party defendant in said action, may be interrogated without his consent. The action is one to quiet title to an undivided one-half interest in certain real property situated in the county of Alameda, for an accounting of the rents, issues, and profits thereof,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marple v. JacksonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Nicklaus v. DahnIndiana Supreme Court · 1878

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. McClatchy Newspapers v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Peterson v. PetersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  3. Tobias v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Rothschild v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Schwartz v. BrandonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

9 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