Legal Opinion
Massae v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 30, 1981No. Civ. 51014PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CALDECOTT, P. J.
Petitioners Charles E. and Bernita E. Massae seek mandate (under Code Civ. Proc., § 400) to compel the Humboldt County Superior Court to vacate its order changing venue and to enter a new order denying a change of venue. This court issued the alternative writ.
The issue is whether the Massaes’ action is “local” or “transitory” for venue purposes. If it is local, it should have been retained in Humboldt County. If it is transitory, the trial court’s order was proper. (Cf. generally, 2 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (2d ed. 1970) Actions, § 416, p. 1248 et seq.)
The Massaes filed…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Peiser v. MettlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Sterrett's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Neet v. HolmesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Howe v. TuckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Standard Brands of California v. BryceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- K.R.L. Partnership v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Prawoto v. PrimeLendingDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2010
- Dow Agrosciences LLC v. Superior Court of Alameda Cnty., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Dow Agrosciences LLC v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Kids Against Pollution v. CALIFORNIA DENTAL ASS'NCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003