From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stevens v. Superior Court

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two
Nov 14, 1930
109 Cal.App. 522 (Cal. Ct. App. 1930)

Opinion

Docket No. 7608.

November 14, 1930.

PROCEEDING in Mandamus to compel the Superior Court of Los Angeles County to overrule a demurrer. Writ denied.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Wm. C. Ring for Petitioner.

Everett W. Mattoon, County Counsel, and S.V.O. Pritchard, Deputy County Counsel, for Respondent.


By a complaint consisting of several counts or causes of action, the petitioner instituted a suit in the superior court for $500 alleged to have been earned as commission while in the employment of the defendants therein named. A demurrer interposed upon the ground that said court had no jurisdiction of the action was sustained, and the plaintiff has petitioned for a writ of mandamus to require the overruling of the demurrer and a trial of the issues.

[1] The superior court is without jurisdiction of the subject matter of the action. ( Scott v. Superior Court, 108 Cal.App. 764 [ 292 P. 290].) The complaint contains certain allegations as to the inability of the plaintiff to ascertain the amount of business transacted by defendants, and prays an accounting, but since the amount alleged to be due the plaintiff is elsewhere stated as a definite sum the averments are not sufficient to confer jurisdiction. ( Kinley v. Thelen, 158 Cal. 175 [ 110 P. 513].)

The writ is denied.

Thompson (Ira F.), J., and Archbald, J., pro tem., concurred.


Summaries of

Stevens v. Superior Court

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two
Nov 14, 1930
109 Cal.App. 522 (Cal. Ct. App. 1930)
Case details for

Stevens v. Superior Court

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM T. STEVENS, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two

Date published: Nov 14, 1930

Citations

109 Cal.App. 522 (Cal. Ct. App. 1930)
293 P. 620