Legal Opinion · Dissent

Skelly Estate Co. v. City & County of San Francisco

California Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 1937No. S. F. 15664Published

1Dissent

EDMONDS, J., Dissenting.

I cannot agree with the conclusions reached by my associates. By the constitutional amendment in controversy (article XI, section 20), the expenditures of the respondent city and county shall not in any year exceed by more than five per cent its expenditures for the preceding year unless authorized by a vote of the people or “unless previously authorized by the State Board of Equalization in such manner as may be provided by law”. It also provides that “the legislature shall pass all laws necessary to carry into effect the provisions of this section”. Section 3714b of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. French v. EdwardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  2. Francis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Uhl v. BadaraccoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  4. State Auditor v. Jackson CountySupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
  5. Ryan v. ByramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935

4 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