Department of Consumer Affairs v. Superior Court

• Decision Date: 26 May 1977
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS of the State of California, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT of the State of California, IN AND FOR the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Respondent; John F. NOTTINGHAM, M.D., Real Party in Interest. Civ. 41139.

Page 120

139 Cal.Rptr. 120

71 Cal.App.3d 97

DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS of the State of California, Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT of the State of California, IN AND FOR the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Respondent John F. NOTTINGHAM, M.D., Real Party in Interest.

Civ. 41139.

Court of Appeal, First District, Division 2, California.

May 26, 1977.

Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen., Louis C. Castro, Deputy Atty. Gen., San Francisco, for petitioner.

John F. Nottingham, M.D., real party in interest; in pro per.

ROUSE, Associate Justice.

Petitioner has made application for a writ of prohibition/mandate, with due notice to real party in interest. Real party in interest has filed opposition to the petition. We have determined that an alternative writ or order to show cause would add nothing to the full presentation already made, and that, in light of the circumstances, a peremptory writ is proper. (Code Civ.Proc., § 1088; 5 Witkin, Cal.Procedure (2d ed. 1971) Extraordinary Writs, p. 3919; Goodenough v. Superior Court (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 692, 697, 96 Cal.Rptr. 165.)

The record shows that real party sought judicial review of a decision of the Board of Medical Quality Assurance (formerly the State Board of Medical Examiners) by administrative mandamus. That decision ordered that the license authorizing petitioner to practice medicine and surgery in the State of California be revoked effective August 19, 1976. On December 10, 1976, on real party's application to proceed in forma pauperis, the court ordered that 'the Administrative Hearings Recorder and the Court Recorder prepare transcripts of hearings conducted on May 25 and 26 in the above matter . . ..'

On February 25, 1977, petitioner moved to vacate the order of December 10, 1976, on the ground that the court was not authorized to order that a transcript be prepared for an indigent at the expense of a public agency, citing Civil Service Commission v. Superior Court (1976) 63 Cal.App.3d 627, 133 Cal.Rptr. 825. On March 16, 1977, respondent court denied the motion and ordered that petitioner provide real party with a transcript of the administrative record of his hearing before the Board of Medical Examiners held May 25 and 26, 1976, wherein real party's physician's and surgeon's license No. A--21231 was revoked. On April 12, 1977, petitioner made application for this writ.

In Civil Service Commission v. Superior Court, supra, at page 632, 133 Cal.Rptr. at page 827, the court held that the...