Woolwine v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for Writ of Mandamus to compel the Superior Court of Los Angeles County to make an order substituting the district attorney as attorney for the county in certain pending actions. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Thomas Lee Woolwine, Frank W. Stafford and Geo. E. Cryer for Petitioner. A. J. Hill, Robert B. Murphey and Paul Vallee for Respondents.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
—This is an original proceeding in this court for a writ of mandate.
The petition prays for a writ to compel the superior court of Los Angeles County to make and enter an order in each of three certain actions pending in said court, to which the county of Los Angeles is a party, in one of them as a party plaintiff and in the others as defendant, substituting the petitioner, as district attorney of said county, as attorney for the county in said actions, respectively, in place and stead of A. J. Hill, Esq., who is now the attorney of record for the county in each of said actions.
The plaintiff…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hornblower v. DudenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Heinlen v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Lassen County v. ShinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Merriam v. BarnumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Shirley v. City of BeniciaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Reuter v. Bd. of Supervisors of San MateoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Ward v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Harvey v. County of ButteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Nielsen v. RichardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- Barnard v. YoungIdaho Supreme Court · 1926
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.