Opinion
Rehearing Granted Sept. 13, 1934.
Appeal from Superior Court, Los Angeles County; Walter S. Gates, Judge.
Certiorari proceeding by W. C. Smith to review an order of the Board of Police Commissioners of the city of Los Angeles and the members thereof, suspending petitioner’s used-car dealer’s permit. From a judgment annulling the order and enjoining enforcement thereof, respondents appeal.
Reversed.
COUNSEL
Ray L. Chesebro, City Atty., Frederick von Schrader, Asst. City Atty., and G. Ellsworth Meyer, Deputy City Atty., all of Los Angeles, for appellants.
Sparling & Teel, of Los Angeles, for respondent.
OPINION
SCOTT, Justice pro tem.
Respondent, a used-car dealer, sold a used automobile to a customer under circumstances which caused appellants to conduct a hearing and make an order under Los Angeles city ordinance No. 69,620 suspending respondent’s permit for thirty days. On certiorari to the superior court judgment was there rendered which, after reciting the fact that there had been a hearing in that court, continues: "The court having considered said petition and return and the facts and issues thereunder and thereby established and raised, and the law applicable thereto, the court being of the opinion that the ordinance is valid, but that the judgt is misrepresented by the order," and thereupon it annulled the said order of the board and enjoined it from taking any steps in the enforcement thereof. The judgment of the said court is ambiguous and uncertain. It contains nothing upon which its order could be predicated annulling the order of the board. The petition filed by respondent asking for the issuance of the writ contains no language which would explain the portion of the judgment above quoted, even if this court were to resort to it in search of such an explanation. Unless it affirmatively appears from the record that the inferior tribunal (in this case the board of police commissioners) exceeded its jurisdiction, a higher court may not annul its order or judgment on certiorari. Code Civ. Proc. § 1074; 4 Cal.Jur. 1105, art. VIII. Evidence adduced upon the hearing before an inferior board or tribunal having limited jurisdiction may be brought up to the reviewing court upon certiorari for the sole purpose of determining whether or not from such evidence before it the finding of a jurisdictional fact by such inferior board or tribunal is sustainable; and if there be no evidence to sustain such decision it must be annulled. In such a case the inquiry is strictly limited to the facts which were before the board and on which it acted in making its orders. Security-First National Bank v. Board of Supervisors, 135 Cal.App. 208, 26 P.2d 862. But in this case, it does not appear that the court undertook to declare the evidence insufficient to support the order of the board, nor that it was in fact so inadequate as to render the order of the board void for want of jurisdiction. An order of the reviewing court which, without legal basis therefor, undertakes to annul the action of the inferior board or tribunal cannot be upheld on appeal.
Judgment appealed from reversed.
We concur: CRAIG, Acting P. J.; DESMOND, J.