Court Refusal to Grant An Agreed Trial Continuance
In Lorraine v. McComb (1934), 220 Cal. 753, the Supreme Court had before it a statute which required the court to grant a continuance of a trial or hearing on any motion or demurrer when all attorneys of record agreed to the continuance.
When the trial court refused to grant a continuance, even though all counsel had stipulated to it, a writ of mandate was sought nullifying the trial court's order.
In denying the writ, the court stated:
" 'One of the powers which has always been recognized as inherent in courts, which are protected in their existence, their powers and jurisdiction by constitutional provisions, has been the right to control its order of business and to so conduct the same that the rights of all suitors before them may be safeguarded.
This power has been recognized as judicial in its nature, and as being a necessary appendage to a court organized to enforce rights and redress wrongs.' We cannot ascribe to the legislature the intent to make the action of the parties compulsory upon the court in each instance." (220 Cal. at pp. 756-757.)