From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brock v. Superior Court

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One
Dec 3, 1931
119 Cal.App. 5 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931)

Opinion

Docket No. 8180.

December 3, 1931.

APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandate to compel the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and Dudley S. Valentine, Judge, to hear and determine an application for attorney fees, etc. Denied.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Leon B. Brown for Petitioners.

No appearance for Respondents.


THE COURT.

On petition for writ of mandate to require of respondent court that in a pending action it proceed to hear and determine the matter of an application for attorney fees, costs and temporary support of minor child.

[1] Petitioner claims that the court has refused to exercise its jurisdiction in the matter, but the facts stated in the petition show the contrary. When the order to show cause came before the court the matter was submitted upon a stipulation of facts. Thereupon the court entered an order denying the requested relief, "on account of this Court not having jurisdiction to award temporary attorney fees, costs, or support on two grounds; that the child is not within the jurisdiction of this Court, also that provisions in Section 137, Civ. Code., in re Attorney's fees, costs and support money do not apply in this case".

It thus appears that the court did not deny its jurisdiction to pass upon the application. It did pass upon and determine said application, but refused the requested allowance, because the court was of the opinion that it did not have authority to make such allowance to a child not residing in this state and not present in this state, in an action to compel a father to support his child. If the court erred in this conclusion (which we do not decide), it was only an error made by the court in the exercise of its jurisdiction. It was not a refusal to act upon the merits of the matter presented.

The petition for writ of mandate is denied.


Summaries of

Brock v. Superior Court

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One
Dec 3, 1931
119 Cal.App. 5 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931)
Case details for

Brock v. Superior Court

Case Details

Full title:HELEN STARR BROCK et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One

Date published: Dec 3, 1931

Citations

119 Cal.App. 5 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931)
5 P.2d 659

Citing Cases

Sampsell v. Superior Court

" Nor is the opinion of the District Court of Appeal in Brock v. Superior Court, 119 Cal.App. 5, 6 [ 5 P.2d…

Robinson v. Superior Court

In either case if the effect is to preclude a hearing and judgment on the merits of a matter properly before…