What is the general contention made by Pacific in its application for judicial review?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from West Pico Furniture Co. of Los Angeles v. Superior Court In and For Los Angeles County, 15 Cal.Rptr. 119, 364 P.2d 295, 56 Cal.2d 407 (Cal. 1961):
The second general contention made by Pacific is that petitioner has failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion, and therefore is not entitled to relief. Undoubtedly, as pointed out in the Greyhound case, supra, the trial court [56 Cal.2d 415] has considerable discretion in matters pertaining to discovery. It is equally true that such discretion will not be set aside in the absence of abuse. The proper rule was stated in Ryan v. Superior Court, 186 Cal.App.2d 813, 9 Cal.Rptr. 147, 150, as follows:
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
