Case ID: cal_98/html/0602-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The Court", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[ 15227.
    In Bank.
    — June 12,1893.]
    COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY, Respondent.
    Change of Place of Trial—Order Overruling Motion—Mandamus—Remedy by Appeal. — When a motion to change the place of trial of an action is overruled without delay,' an appeal from the order affords a complete remedy, and mandamus will not lie to compel the court to change the place of trial. Mandamus is only proper when the court unreasonably delays to decide the motion.
    Mandamus to compel the Superior Court of San Joaquin. County to grant a change of venue.
    The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
    P. W. Bennett, T. C. Van JVess3 aud L. A. Bedman» for Petitioner.
   The Court

This is an original proceeding by mandamus to compel the superior court of Sau Joaquin County to change the place of trial of an action of ejectment to which the judge of said court are parties defendant.

A motion to change the place of trial was made and promptly overruled. The proper remedy of the petitioner was an appeal from that order. In such cases mandamus is only proper when the court refuses or unreasonably delays to decide the motion, as in Krumdick v. White, 32 Pac. Rep. 800, and Livermore v. Brundage, 64 Cal. 299. But when the motion is overruled without delay, an appeal from the order affords a complete remedy, aud if the case is for any reason one of urgency the hearing of the appeal can be expedited so as to reach a decision as soon as it can be reached in an original proceeding.

Proceeding dismissed.