
    CHILDS v. EDMUNDS, Judge, etc.
    No. 11,498;
    March 9, 1886.
    10 Pac. 130.
    Prohibition.—The Enforcement of a Writ of Assistance, as against one not a party to the action, cannot be restrained by a writ of prohibition, as there is in such ease an adequate remedy at law by appeal from the order granting the writ.
    
    Application for writ of prohibition to restrain the enforcement of a writ of assistance, obtained against petitioner for the purpose of dispossessing him, in a foreclosure suit to which he was not a party.
    E. A. & G. E. Lawrence for petitioner; J. R. Brandon for respondent.
    
      
       Cited, and approved in Havemeyer v. Superior Court, 84 Cal. 398, 24 Pac. 139, where it is explained as a case in which .the petitioner had a right to- appeal and by his appeal could stay the enforcement of the writ of assistance; and is distinguished from a ease where an appeal would furnish no remedy for the wrong threatened, as was the case then under consideration.
      Cited in a note in 111 Am. St. Rep. 953, on the writ of prohibition.
    
   By the COURT.

The application for a writ of prohibition in this case is denied for the reason that petitioner has an adequate remedy by appeal from the order complained of.  