Pennell v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
McLUCAS, J., pro tem.
This is an application for a writ of prohibition to prevent the respondents from conducting any further proceedings on account of an order to show cause why the petitioner should not be punished for contempt of court for failure to pay attorney’s fees in a divorce action as ordered and adjudged by the respondent court.
It appears from the pleadings that an interlocutory judgment of divorce was granted by respondent court on December 28, 1925, wherein it was ordered as follows: “It is further ordered that W. C. Pennell pay to Duke Stone, Esquire, attorney for plaintiff,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Sharon v. SharonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Forbes v. HydeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Adams v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- In Re Estate of PuseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- In re Estate of LevinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Miller v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- Keck v. KeckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Collins v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1936
- People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Batte v. BandyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.