Legal Opinion

Shearer v. Flannery

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 5, 1924No. Civ. No. 2810PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.

This proceeding was instituted to compel the defendant, as auditor of Sutter County, to issue a warrant for "salary alleged to be due petitioner as county surveyor under the provisions of section 4270 of the Political Code, as amended in 1923. (Stats. 1923, p. 1139.) Judgment was entered in favor of defendant and the petitioner has appealed. The facts are undisputed.

Prior to the legislative session of 1921 Sutter County was in the forty-eighth class. Section 4277, subdivision 12, as amended in 1919, fixed the compensation of surveyor in counties of the forty-eighth class at $900 per annum.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Coulter v. PoolCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Farrar v. SteenberghCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Stone v. PryorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1898
  4. Purcell v. ParksIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
  5. Galeener v. HoneycuttCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. People v. WeitzelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Pierce v. RileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  3. Rudley v. TobiasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. In Re CaspersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  5. Arnold v. SullengerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927

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