Court Opinion

ID: 9726212
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 12:37:32.059221+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:24.287496
License: Public Domain

ANDREEN, J.
I concur in the judgment and find no fault in the reliance of court and counsel on Gregory v. Hamilton (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 213 [142 Cal.Rptr. 563]. The court signed its order on March 3, 1980. Hastings v. Matlock (1980) 107 Cal.App.3d 876 [166 Cal.Rptr. 229], cited by the dissent, was filed July 1, 1980, and published in the advance sheet dated July 31, 1980.
At the time of the decision below, Gregory was law, and was properly invoked by the trial court under the doctrine of stare decisis. (Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450 [20 Cal.Rptr. 321, 369 P.2d 937].) The fact that Hastings came along later and demonstrated the fallacy in Gregory does not change this. “Courts exercising inferior jurisdiction must accept the law declared by courts of superior jurisdiction....” (Id., at p. 455.)