RUBY v. SUPERIOR COURT IN AND FOR CITY COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 10

Reset A A Font size: Print

District Court of Appeal, First District, Division 1, California.

RUBY et al. v. SUPERIOR COURT IN AND FOR CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Dept. No. 10.

Civ. No. 14973.

Decided: May 29, 1951

Donovan Ruby, Helen Ruby and John P. Andrews in pro. per. Herbert Pothier, Marcel E. Cerf, Robinson & Leland, San Francisco, for respondents.

The petition for a writ of mandate was filed on May 1, 1951. On May 5, 1951, it was denied without opinion. A petition for rehearing was filed on May 9, 1951, and denied, with opinion, on May 15, 1951. On May 29, 1951 petition has tendered for filing a document entitled ‘Petitioners' Petition for a Rehearing, also Ultimatum.’ While this court has power to consider a petition for rehearing for 30 days after rendition of its order of denial, such petition for rehearing should be filed within 15 days of the rendition. The last day for filing such a petition in this case was May 20, 1951. This petition is tendered 9 days late, and no excuse is offered for its late filing.

While this court has power on a proper showing to permit a late filing, such permission is hereby denied, not only because no excuse for the late filing is tendered, but also because an examination of the document demonstrates that, were it filed, it would be a contempt of the appellate court. The document contains threats, insinuations and charges against the integrity of both the appellate court and the superior court. Such a document, if filed, would subject petitioners to a charge of contempt of the appellate court. See cases collected 5 Cal.Jur, p. 900, § 10.

Permission to file the document is refused.

PER CURIAM.

Copied to clipboard