Legal Opinion · Dissent

Butterworth v. Boyd

California Supreme Court

Decided September 2, 1938No. S. F. 16017Published

1Dissent

EDMONDS, J., Dissenting.

The charter provision of the City and County of San Francisco which is attacked in the present proceeding provides, in effect, for compulsory health insurance of municipal employees. It allows the Health Service Board, a private organization over which the city has no control, to' order the city controller to deduct an amount to be determined by it from the compensation of each employee of the city and deposit such sum “with the treasurer of the City and County to the credit and for the use of the system”. Certain persons shall be and others may be exempted from this…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Fragley v. PhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'n v. MayorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
  3. Bank v. BellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  4. Gerth v. DominguezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  5. People Ex Rel. Davidson v. MertzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934

1 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