Legal Opinion
Ballentine v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
Decided April 10, 1945No. S. F. 17137PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PETERS, J. pro tem.
Edward W. Ballentine, claiming to have been found in contempt of an order to pay alimony, and alleging that the trial court was without jurisdiction to enforce the order, brings this proceeding in prohibition to restrain its enforcement. His original petition also sought a writ of mandate to compel the trial court to dismiss a certain divorce proceeding pending therein. Prior to reaching this court the petition for a writ of mandate was abandoned.
On September 10, 1943, the San Mateo Superior Court entered an interlocutory decree of divorce in favor of Mary T. Ballentine…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re McCartyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Selowsky v. Superior Court of Napa CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Newell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Parnham v. ParnhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Moore v. Justices of the Municipal CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- H. J. Heinz Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- County of Los Angeles v. State Department of Public HealthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Johnson v. JohnsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1994
- Jacoby v. JacobyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
- Estate of Barrett v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1971
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.