Legal Opinion
Agnew v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 20, 1958No. Civ. 22917PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KINCAID, J. pro tem. *
This is a petition for writ of mandate directed to respondent superior court requiring it to make its order directing John A. Cronin, a witness in a deposition proceeding, to answer certain questions. No answer to the petition has been filed by Cronin.
The witness Cronin refused to answer some 17 questions on grounds of immateriality and of a privileged relationship existing between himself as attorney and defendant C. N. Young as his client.
“ Mandamus is the appropriate remedy to secure the enforcement of a litigant’s statutory right to take depositions, and an appeal…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Brown v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- McClatchy Newspapers v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- Tanzola v. De RitaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- People v. OttenstrorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Hession v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- United Services Automobile Association v. WerleyAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
- Rosato v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- Stearns v. Los Angeles City School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Glade v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Felts v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1979
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.