Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Annie ELLENBERGER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. The CITY OF OAKLAND, a Municipal Corporation, The Police and Fire Retirement Board, formerly the Police Relief and Pension Board, Mayor Clifford Rishell, Captain Anthony Bolger, Ted Dreyer, Elvyn C. Evers and Steven O'Day, John Collier, City Attorney of Oakland, Defendants and Respondents.
Appellant appeals from a judgment denying her petition for writ of mandate on the ground of res judicata.
Appellant is seeking a pension as the widow of a policeman. The basic facts will be found in Ellenberger v. City of Oakland, 59 Cal.App.2d 337, 139 P.2d 67, wherein the court affirmed a judgment denying her the same relief sought here. Since that decision appellant has sought to reopen the appeal in that case, Ellenberger v. City of Oakland, 76 Cal.App.2d 828, 174 P.2d 461; filed a second petition for writ of mandate in the Superior Court in which a judgment adverse to her was affirmed on the grounds of res judicata and the running of the statute of limitations, Ellenberger v. Warren, 90 Cal.App.2d 785, 204 P.2d 115; and sought some form of relief in the federal court, Ellenberger v. Warren, 9 Cir., 199 F.2d 664.
In this proceeding appellant is again attempting to relitigate the same claim. We have every sympathy for appellant's obviously sincere belief in the justice of her cause but there must be some finality to all litigation. Appellant appears in pro. per., as she has in all the later stages of this litigation, and she again attempts to charge fraud of various sorts against various persons. These charges are similar to those made and disposed of in Ellenberger v. City of Oakland, supra, 76 Cal.App.2d 828, 174 P.2d 461, and Ellenberger v. Warren, 90 Cal.App.2d 785, 204 P.2d 115. The trial judge properly decided that the cause of action is concluded by the doctrine of res judicata.
Judgment affirmed.
DOOLING, Justice.
NOLURSE, P. J., and KAUFMAN, J., concur.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: Civ. 16499.
Decided: October 03, 1955
Court: District Court of Appeal, First District, Division 2, California.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)