
    GOODWIN et al. v. GLAZER.
    A mandamus will not lie against the clerk of the District Court, to compel him to issue execution on a money judgment, rendered in the Court of which he is clerk.
    For all damages resulting from such refusal, the plaintiff has, in ordinary course of law, a plain and adequate remedy by an action on the bond of the officer, and it is well settled that the writ will not issue in such cases.
    Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, County of Los Angeles.
    Application to the Court below for a writ of mandamus.
    
    The plaintiffs recovered, in the Court below, a judgment against the defendant, for the sum of $5,243 22 and costs of suit, and afterwards applied to the clerk of the Court in which the judgment was rendered, to issue execution thereon. The clerk declined to issue the execution, on the ground that an appeal had been taken therefrom to the Supreme Court. Plaintiff then applied to the District Court for a writ of mandamus, to compel the clerk to issue execution on said judgment. The Court ordered the writ to issue, from which order the defendant appealed to this Court.
    
      E. J. C. Kewen for Appellant.
   Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, J., and Baldwin, J., concurring.

The mandamus in this case was improperly granted. Plaintiff had recovered a moneyed judgment, upon which the clerk of the Court refused to issue execution. For all damages resulting from this refusal, the plaintiff has, in ordinary course of law, a plain and adequate remedy, by an action on the bond of the officer, and it is well settled that the writ will not issue in such cases.

Judgment reversed.  