California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Chung Kao v. Cal. Dep't of Corr. & Rehab., 198 Cal.Rptr.3d 862, 244 Cal.App.4th 1326 (Cal. App. 2016):
petition is for traditional mandamus under section 1085. (See 1085, subd. (a) ["A writ of mandate may be issued by any court to any inferior tribunal, corporation, board, or person, to compel the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins, as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station"]; Gong v. City of Fremont (1967) 250 Cal.App.2d 568, 571, 58 Cal.Rptr. 664 [a writ of mandate compelling a ministerial act which the law specifically enjoins is commonly called " traditional mandamus' "].)
" The statute of limitations applicable to a writ of mandamus under [section] 1085 depends upon the nature of the obligation sought to be enforced. [Citation.] [Citation.] It is often difficult to decide which statute of limitations governs an action for writ of mandate. The code provisions authorizing this action are silent as to the time within which it must be filed. [Citation.] Accordingly, the courts have developed the rule that the question is to be resolved not by the remedy prayed for but by the nature of the underlying right or obligation that the action seeks to enforce. " (Branciforte Heights, LLC v. City Of Santa Cruz (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 914, 926, 42 Cal.Rptr.3d 96.)
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.