Legal Opinion

City of Whittier v. Dixon

California Supreme Court

Decided August 11, 1944No. L. A. 19005PublishedCited by 55 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTraynor, J.

By this proceeding in mandamus petitioners seek to compel respondent city clerk to countersign a warrant for the payment of the costs of publication of an ordinance of intention, in a proceeding for the formation of Vehicle Parking District No. 1 of the City of Whittier, under the Vehicle Parking District Act of 1943. (Stats. 1943, ch. 971, p. 2859; Deering’s Gen. Laws, 1943, Act 5131.3.) Respondent has refused to countersign the warrant contending *666that the statute pursuant to which the publication was made, is invalid. The regularity of the proceedings is admitted. It is established that…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. The Housing Authority v. DockweilerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. In Re PfahlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. In Re SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Lent v. TillsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  5. Heron v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by55 opinions

  1. Redevelopment Agency v. HayesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  2. Lockyer v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  3. City of Phoenix v. DonofrioArizona Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Bowman v. City of Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1950
  5. Dean v. KuchelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950

50 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