Case Name: NELITA ESTRADA SMITH, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1905-07-08
Citations: 147 Cal. 336
Docket Number: S. F. No. 4353
Parties: NELITA ESTRADA SMITH, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Reports
Volume: 147
Pages: 336–337

Head Matter:
[S. F. No. 4353.
In Bank.
July 8, 1905.]
NELITA ESTRADA SMITH, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent.
Divorce—Interlocutory Decree—Entry in Judgment-Book—Time tor Appeal—Final Degree.—Upon the proper construction of section 132 of the Civil Code, as recently amended, an interlocutory decree of divorce must be entered in the judgment-book one year before a final decree can be granted, and the time for appeal from the interlocutory decree of divorce continues for six months after such entry.
Id.—Entry op Order in Minutes—Mandamus.—A mere order for an interlocutory decree entered in the minutes after a hearing, with nothing further done, is not sufficient t,o sustain a writ of mandate to compel the court to enter a final decree within one year thereafter.
' APPLICATION for Writ of Mandate to the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. J. C. B. Ilebbard, Judge.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.'
R. M. F. Soto, and O. F. Meldon, for Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent.

Opinion:
THE COURT.
This is a petition for a writ of mandate requiring the superior court to enter a final decree of divorce.
In an action by petitioner against her husband the court heard the evidence, and an order was entered in its minutes reciting the submission and consideration of the cause, and adding: "It is ordered by the court that an interlocutory decree of divorce be entered herein in favor of the plaintiff on grounds of defendant's willful neglect and desertion." Nothing further was done. No findings were filed and no decree ever entered in the judgment-book.
More than a year after the entry in the court minutes above quoted, petitioner, upon proper notice, moved the court to enter a final decree, which motion was denied.
These being the facts, the petition for the writ of mandate must be denied. We hold that upon the proper construction of section 132 of the Civil Code, as recently amended, an interlocutory decree of divorce must be entered in the judgment-book one year before a final decree can be granted, and under section 131 the right of appeal from the interlocutory decree continues for six months after such entry.
Writ denied.