111 Wash. 101 | Wash. | 1920
The relator, by mandamus proceedings in the superior court for Pierce county, commenced an action against the treasurer of that county to have a portion of the tax levied and assessed against
Relator contends he is fortified in the present application by some of the reasons given by the trial court in making the ruling complained of. To the contrary, we are satisfied the result of the ruling must control. "With both parties before it, the jurisdiction of the trial court was never questioned, nor did that court refuse to entertain jurisdiction; it only sustained a general demurrer to the sufficiency of the application for a writ of mandate.. If relator were allowed to prevail in this proceeding, it would amount to permitting the writ of mandate to take the place of the remedy by appeal. It would be equal to saying now, in the absence of any showing or reason that there is not a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, that the superior court, having jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the parties, had committed error in the process of settling the pleadings in the cause. It would result in a direction from this
We take no occasion to review many cases and authorities cited from this and other courts in the arguments of respective counsel, feeling satisfied that what we have said herein is sufficient for the proper disposal of the case.
' The application for the writ will be denied.
Holcomb, C. J., Tolman, Parker, and Fullerton, JJ., concur.