Opinion

Marchetti v. Payne

  • 197 Cal. 519
  • 241 P. 873
  • 1925 Cal. LEXIS 261
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Dec 1, 1925
Status
Published
Author
Richards
On the bench
Richards
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 34.9%

The opinion

RICHARDS, J.

The petitioner herein applies for a writ of mandate directed to the respondent as county auditor of the county of Los Angeles, requiring the latter to issue to petitioner a warrant drawn upon the county treasury for the sum of $129 alleged to be due and payable to the petitioner as his salary as judge of the municipal court of the city of Long Beach for the period between July 24, 1925, and July 31, 1925. The single question presented by this application is as to whether the petitioner became or was a judge of the said municipal court during said period or at all. From the stipulated statement of facts filed herein it appears that prior to July 24, 1925, the petitioner was a duly appointed, qualified and acting justice of the peace in and for Los Angeles township in said county of Los Angeles, a portion of which lay partly within and partly without the corporate limits of the city of Long Beach; that by virtue of the provisions of law and of amendment number 35 to the charter of the city of Long Beach, there was on July 24, 1925, established in said city of Long Beach a municipal court. There is also set forth in said stipulated statement of facts a statement to the effect that on July 23, 1925, and also on July 24, 1925, the board of supervisors passed and adopted certain ordinances identical in form, purporting to rearrange the boundaries of the townships of Los Angeles County, the text of which ordinances is appended to the return of the respondent to the alternative writ issued herein. The main question presented by this application is, we think, sufficiently answered by our decision in the case of

Bakkenson

v.

Superior Court, ante,

p. 504 [ 241 Pac. 874 ], wherein it is held that as to townships partly within and partly without the boundaries of municipalities qualified to establish municipal courts within their territorial limits and establishing the same, the existence and jurisdiction of the justices’ courts within such townships and of the justices of the peace functioning therein are each unaffected thereby except in so far as the territory embraced within such municipalities is concerned. Such being our conclusion in that case it follows that the petitioner in "this proceeding still continues to be a. justice of the peace of Los

*521

Angeles township, notwithstanding the establishment of a municipal court in the city of Long Beach and has not by the act of such establishment or otherwise become a judge of such municipal court. It further follows that the action of the board of supervisors of the county of Los Angeles taken in the passing and immediate putting into effect of the ordinances above referred to or either of them is an immaterial factor in the disposition of this case, since it appears upon the face thereof that the township of Los Angeles, of which this petitioner is a justice of the peace, still continues in being and that the justice’s court thereof, of which the petitioner is such justice of the peace, also still continues to exist and function.

It follows that the application of the petitioner herein for a writ of mandate must be and the same is hereby denied.

Myers, C. J., Lawlor, J., Shenk, J., Seawell, J., Waste, J., and Lennon, J., concurred.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.