State ex rel. Jefferson County v. Hatch

Citations

• 36 Wash. 164
• 78 P. 796
• 1904 Wash. LEXIS 537

Syllabus

<p>Appeal and Error — Decision—Judgment of Supreme Court for Costs — Tax Foreclosure Procedure — Executions. Where, upon an appeal from a tax foreclosure judgment, the supreme court affirms the judgment and enters a judgment for costs against the appellants and the sureties for a specified sum, and directs that execution issue therefor, the appellant is. entitled to have execution issued out of the superior court for the collection of the costs, although the supreme court judgment does not in terms follow the direction of the statute as to the disposition of the funds deposited with the county treasurer, the same being applied by law and the order of the lower court as a credit on the tax judgment.</p> <p>Mandamus — Appeal — Judgment — Execution — Refusal of Lower Court to Carry Out Directions of Supreme Court— Adequacy of Remedy by Appeal. Mandamus lies to compel the judge of the superior court, who has quashed an execution for costs, directed by the supreme court on affirming a decision, to cause execution to issue therefor, since the remedy by appeal is neither speedy nor adequate to enforce the judgments of the supreme court after an appeal is once decided.</p> <p>Executions — Power of Court — Mandamus. After a judge has quashed an execution to which a party is entitled, it can not be objected that mandamus will not lie to compel him to cause another to issue because such issuance is a ministerial duty of the clerk, as the court can control its executions.</p> <p>Mandamus — Demurrer—Issues of Fact How Raised. After an application for a writ of mandate has been submitted to the supreme court upon a demurrer in the application, the defendants are not entitled, upon the overruling of the demurrer, to leave to answer, as issues of fact must be presented at the time of the hearing, which is final.</p>