Legal Opinion

Elser v. Gill Net Number One

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 31, 1966No. Civ. 23058; Civ. 23059PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTaylor, J.

On this appeal by the State from adverse judgments in these consolidated actions to forfeit defendant gill nets, 1 the only question is whether the trial court properly concluded that interveners and respondents Grover Reed and Dewey George (hereafter interveners) are exempt from the provisions of the Fish and Game Code pursuant to section 12300 of that code. 2

The basic facts are not disputed. On April 5 and 19, 1964, respectively, a department game warden seized defendant gill nets, as the meshes of each exceeded the mesh size permitted by sections 8664 and 8686 of the code. 3 The first net,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Donnelly v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Organized Village of Kake v. EganSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Alaska Pacific Fisheries v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  4. Tulee v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  5. Klopstock v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Mattz v. ArnettSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. United States v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  3. People v. McCoveyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  4. United States v. State Of WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  5. Arnett v. Five Gill NetsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API