Legal Opinion
Pacific R.R. Adver. Co. v. Conrad
California Supreme Court
Decided June 26, 1914No. S.F. No. 6247PublishedCited by 5 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Plaintiff sought an injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with advertising cards which it was displaying in the railway cars operated by the Southern Pacific Company in Alameda. The interference of the chief of police was based upon the refusal of the plaintiff to pay the sum exacted by the license ordinance of the city of Alameda. The vital question upon the trial and upon this appeal is whether that ordinance is so unjust, oppressive, and discriminatory as to be illegal and void. Judgment passed for defendant upon general demurrer sustained to plaintiff’s complaint, and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Paul v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- International Textbook Co. v. PiggSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Williams v. FearsSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Butler Bros. Shoe Co. v. United States Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
- New York Ex Rel. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. KnightSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- E. A. Hoffman Candy Co. v. City of Newport BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Redwood Theatres, Inc. v. City of ModestoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Strother v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Court of Appeal · 1949
- C. E. Stevens Co. v. Foster & Kleiser Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940
- Auston v. WilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938