Anthony v. Dunlap

Decided July 1, 1857

California Supreme Court · decided 1857-07-01

Paul B. Anthony filed a bill in the Court below, for the purpose of perpetually enjoining all proceedings on a judgment recovered against him in the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, by the defendant; alleging that he had no notice thereof, ®tc. Defendant demurred to the bill, which was sustained, and final judgment entered for defendant, from which, plaintiff took this appeal.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1857-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently November 1990

11 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Murray, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Burnett, J., concurring.

¶1This was a bill in equity filed in the Fifth District Court, to enjoin the execution of a judgment obtained in the Sixth District.

¶2We have before decided, that one Court had no power to interfere with the judgments and decrees of another Court of concurrent jurisdiction. The only case in which it will bo allowed, is where the Court in which the action or proceeding is pending, is unable by reason of its jurisdiction to afford the relief sought. Any other rule would lead to inextricable confusion.

¶3Judgment affirmed.