From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

First Nat'l. Bank v. Dist. Ct.

Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc
Oct 2, 1967
432 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1967)

Opinion

No. 22814.

Decided October 2, 1967.

Original proceeding. Rule to show cause issued.

Rule Discharged.

1. APPEAL AND ERRORCorrection — Function — Writ. Correction of error is the function of a writ of error.

2. TRIALDecision — Right — Wrong. A trial court has the power to render a right as well as a wrong decision.

3. PROHIBITIONCourt — Jurisdiction — Restrain — Conclusion — Propriety. Prohibition may never be used to restrain a trial court having jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter from proceeding to a final conclusion.

4. Court — Restrain — Error — Question — Writ. Prohibition may not be used to restrain a trial court from committing error in deciding a question properly before it; it may not be used in lieu of writ of error.

Original Proceeding.

Benjamin E. Sweet, Dyer and Swenson, for petitioner.

Ernest Porter, Kenneth D. Barrows, Donald D. Pfeifer, for respondents.


This is an original proceeding.

[1-4] On the petition as presented we deemed it advisable to issue a rule to the respondent judge to show cause why the relief prayed for should not be granted. Upon receipt of the answer to the show cause order and the matter now being at issue, it is apparent from what now has been fully revealed as the problem involved, that the rule to show cause was improvidently issued and we should not have granted the petition. We have been favored with oral argument, and we now conclude that the rule should be discharged under the authority of Leonhart v. District Court, 138 Colo. 1, 329 P.2d 781. We adopt therefrom this pertinent language:"* * * correction of error is the function of a writ of error. A trial court has the power to render a right as well as a wrong decision. 'Prohibition may never be used to restrain a trial court having jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter from proceeding to a final conclusion. Nor may it be used to restrain a trial court from committing error in deciding a question properly before it; it may not be used in lieu of a writ of error.' Prinster et al v. District Court, decided May 17, 1958, 137 Colo. 393, 325 P.2d 938."


The rule is discharged.


Summaries of

First Nat'l. Bank v. Dist. Ct.

Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc
Oct 2, 1967
432 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1967)
Case details for

First Nat'l. Bank v. Dist. Ct.

Case Details

Full title:The First National Bank of Englewood as Guardian of the Estate of Robert…

Court:Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc

Date published: Oct 2, 1967

Citations

432 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1967)
432 P.2d 1

Citing Cases

Weaver Const. v. Dist. Ct.

This holding reflects a general policy which disfavors the use of an original writ where an appeal would be…

Vaughn v. Dist. Ct.

See Leonhart v. District Court, 138 Colo. 1, 329 P.2d 781 (1958). It does not correct mere error or provide a…