General
RAMON MONREAL and RAMON RUES v. THOMAS H. BUSH, County Judge of San Diego County
46 Cal. 79·Supreme Court of California·1873·CA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
[No. 3,469.]
RAMON MONREAL and RAMON RUES v. THOMAS H. BUSH, County Judge of San Diego County.
Certiorari. — Certiorari does not lie to review an erroneous judgment which the Court below had jurisdiction to render.
Error when Court has Jurisdiction.—The rendition oí a judgment for a demand which was not due when the action was commenced is not an excess of jurisdiction, but error in th§ exercise of jurisdiction.
Application for a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court to the County Court of San Diego County.
The petitioners executed a promissory note to Hamilton Bruze, dated September 21st, 1871, for one hundred and forty-three dollars and forty cents, payable one day after date, and on the next day an action was commenced on it before a Justice of the Peace.
The plaintiff had judgment, and the defendants appealed to the County Court.
On the trial the petitioners moved for judgment of non-suit, because a cause of action had not accrued on the note when the suit was commenced. The motion was denied, and the plaintiff again recovered judgment.
The defendants applied for the writ to review the action of the County Court.
W. Jeff. Gatewood, for Petitioners.
[MAJORITY — By the Court:]
By the Court:
The application for a writ of certiorari is denied. The County Court had jurisdiction of the case sought to be brought up for review, and its judgment was, at most, only erroneous. In such case the law has not provided a remedy by certiorari.