Anthony v. Dunlap
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, County of Tuolumne. Paul B. Anthony filed a bill in the Court below, for the purpose of perpetually enjoining all proceedings on a judgment recovered against him in the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, by the defendant; alleging that he had no notice thereof, ®tc. Defendant demurred to the bill, which was sustained, and final judgment entered for defendant, from which, plaintiff took this appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtMurray, C. J.
This was a bill in equity filed in the Fifth District Court, to enjoin the execution of a judgment obtained in the Sixth District.
We have before decided, that one Court had no power to interfere with the judgments and decrees of another Court of concurrent jurisdiction. The only case in which it will bo allowed, is where the Court in which the action or proceeding is pending, is unable by reason of its jurisdiction to afford the relief sought. Any other rule would lead to inextricable confusion.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by14 opinions
- Spreckels v. Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Scott v. RunnerIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
- Lowry v. Indianapolis Traction & Terminal Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1920
- Platto v. DeusterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
- Hawkeye Insurance v. HustonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.