Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court, 57 Cal. 2d 450 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） (1962). In Auto Equity Sales, the Court explained: "Under the doctrine of stare decisis, all tribunals exercising inferior jurisdiction are required to follow decisions of courts exercising superior jurisdiction. Otherwise, the doctrine of stare decisis makes no sense. The decisions of this court are binding upon and must be followed by all the state courts of California. Decisions of every division of the District Courts of Appeal are binding upon all the justice and municipal courts and upon all the superior courts of this state, and this is so whether or not the superior court is acting as a trial or appellate court. Courts exercising inferior jurisdiction must accept the law declared by courts of superior jurisdiction. It is not their function to attempt to overrule decisions of a higher court."
See People v. Kelly, 40 Cal. 4th 106, 113 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） (2006), which explains the 1879 constitutional convention's decision to create a seven-justice court with two three-justice departments.
jstor.org
Friedenberg, Albert M. Solomon Heydenfeldt: A Jewish Jurist Of Alabama and California. Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society. 1902, 10: 129–140. JSTOR 43059669.
Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court, 57 Cal. 2d 450 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） (1962). In Auto Equity Sales, the Court explained: "Under the doctrine of stare decisis, all tribunals exercising inferior jurisdiction are required to follow decisions of courts exercising superior jurisdiction. Otherwise, the doctrine of stare decisis makes no sense. The decisions of this court are binding upon and must be followed by all the state courts of California. Decisions of every division of the District Courts of Appeal are binding upon all the justice and municipal courts and upon all the superior courts of this state, and this is so whether or not the superior court is acting as a trial or appellate court. Courts exercising inferior jurisdiction must accept the law declared by courts of superior jurisdiction. It is not their function to attempt to overrule decisions of a higher court."
See People v. Kelly, 40 Cal. 4th 106, 113 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） (2006), which explains the 1879 constitutional convention's decision to create a seven-justice court with two three-justice departments.
