Legal Opinion

Skidmore v. Dambacher

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 10, 1935No. Civ. 5177PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

Upon rehearing of this proceeding a stipulation of facts was filed, which was theretofore inadvertently omitted from the record. By consent a second stipulation of facts was also filed upon rehearing. The agreed facts which are conceded by these stipulations necessarily change the former determination of this court, which was based chiefly on the lack of proof that the county of Tuolumne possessed the funds with which to satisfy the claim of the petitioner.

This is a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the Auditor of Tuolumne County to audit a claim and issue his warrant therefor in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Skidmore v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Jones v. SturzenbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  3. Laist v. NicholsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Denio v. City of Huntington BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Speer v. KratzensteinNebraska Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Skidmore v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Skidmore v. County of AmadorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Skidmore v. County of SolanoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957

3 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