People ex rel. Downer v. Norton

Citations

• 16 Cal. 436

Syllabus

<p>Relatok conveyed to Y. one-third of certain real estate, in consideration that Y. should attend to a suit pending in the name of relator, for the recovery of the property. Y. employed an attorney to conduct the suit, the attorney of plaintiff being discharged. Relator moved the Court below to substitute another attorney in place of the one employed by Y. Court refused to grant the motion—the only reason urged for the substitution being, that Y. had neglected to prosecute the suit; and it not being shown that the agreement between him and relator had been canceled by the parties. Relator applies to this Court for mandamus: Held, that the writ lies ; that the agreement between relator and Y. does not exclude the former from the right to prosecute the suit, and employ such attorney as he chooses; that the exercise of this right will not affect any right Y. may have in the property or suit; that he may intervene, if a proper case be made, or prosecute his rights independently, or wait until a recovery, and then claim his rights under the contract with relator.</p>