Camron v. Kenfield

Citations

• 57 Cal. 550

Syllabus

<p>Dictum—Bes Judicata—Decision of Supreme • Court — Prohibition — Drainage Act.—The Supreme Court, in refusing a writ of prohibition, decided that the Legislature could not constitutionally extend the office of the writ beyond its scope at common law. It also decided in the same case that the Legislature had not attempted to so extend it. Held, that the latter point decided did not render the first obiter dictum.</p> <p>Prohibition — Constitutional Law — Jurisdiction—Drainage Act.—The Legislature had no power to enact the statute which purports to amend § 1102 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in so far as it attempts to enlarge the office of the writ of prohibition.</p> <p>Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Supreme Court.—Thornton, J., concurring, was of the opinion that the Legislature might enlarge the office of the writ when issuing from the Superior Court, but could not so enlarge the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.</p>