In Re Blois
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a writ of Habeas Corpus originally made to the Supreme Court to procure the discharge of petitioner, who was convicted of violating" an ordinance of the City of Palo Alto. Granted. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
RICHARDS, J., pro tem.
The petitioner applied for a writ of habeas corpus, setting forth his conviction in the police court of the city of Palo Alto for the alleged violation of the provisions of an ordinance of said city entitled, “An ordinance for the protection of the health of the people of the City of Palo Alto, providing for the inspection by the health officer of the City of Palo Alto of laundries and other establishments of like character.” The petitioner, whose laundry establishment is in the city of San Jose, undertook to solicit laundry work in Palo Alto without first procuring a…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- City of S. Pasadena v. Pasadena Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
- In Re SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Ex Parte FrankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
- Country of Plumas v. WheelerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Ex Parte DickeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Amaral v. Cintas Corp. No. 2California Court of Appeal · 2008
- City of Oakland v. BrockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- Gila Meat Co. v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1929
- Acton v. HendersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Carroll v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.