Cerini v. De Long
California Court of Appeal
APPLICATION for mandamus to commissioners under the act of March 14, 1907. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
Mandamus. The petition alleges the following facts: That petitioner is a qualified elector- of the territory described in section 1 of the act approved March 14, 1907 (Stats. 1907, p. 260), relating to the establishment of the boundary line between the counties of Kings and Fresno; that defendants are the duly appointed and qualified commissioners to carry out the provisions of said act; that pursuant to said act said commissioners duly ordered and gave notice of an election to he held within said territory, and each precinct thereof, on December 10, 1907; that said election ¡was so held on…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- County of Calaveras v. BrockwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Gibson v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Borchard v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Pacheco v. BeckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877
- County of Lawrence v. SchmaulhausenIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Town of Pagosa Springs v. PeopleColorado Court of Appeals · 1913
- Poe v. Sheridan CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1916
- Ashley v. RichardIdaho Supreme Court · 1919
- Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District v. HutcheonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Perham v. City of Los AltosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.