Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Rose v. State of California

California Supreme Court

Decided March 4, 1942No. S. F. 16040Published

1Opinion of the Court

19 Cal.2d 713 (1942)

MARY V. ROSE et al., Respondents

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al., Appellants.

S. F. No. 16040.

Supreme Court of California. In Bank.

Mar. 4, 1942.

C. C. Carleton, Frank B. Durkee, C. R. Montgomery and Robert E. Reed for Appellants.

Ray L. Chesebro, City Attorney (Los Angeles), William H. Neal and Leon T. David, Assistant City Attorney, Arthur W. Nordstrom, Deputy City Attorney, John J. O'Toole, City Attorney (San Francisco), Henry Heidelberg and Albert F. Skelly, Deputies City Attorney, Hugh B. Bradford, City Attorney (Sacramento), Archer Bowden, City Attorney (San Jose), F. Bert…

Also in this document: Concurrence; Dissent.

2Cases cited88 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Perry v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  4. Plymouth Coal Co. v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  5. United States v. Great Falls Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API