Aitken v. Roche
California Court of Appeal
APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandate to compel the San Francisco Police Commissioners to honor petitioner’s demand upon the police relief and pension fund. Writ granted. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBrittain, J.
The petitioner seeks by mandamus to require the board of trustees of the police relief and pension fund of the city and county of San Francisco to allow his demand for an amount of money in excess of that to which it is conceded he is entitled. The defendants demur generally to the sufficiency of the petition. A single question of law is presented and it is determinative of the petitioner’s right.
The petitioner became a member of the police department in 1880, and served continuously until 1903, when he was retired on account of physical disability received in the performance of his duty, and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hanscom v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- O'Dea v. CookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- United States v. TylerSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Walton v. CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 1857
- Kavanagh v. Board of Police Pension Fund CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- Kern v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Yeazell v. CopinsArizona Supreme Court · 1965
- Dryden v. Board of Pension CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Hurd v. Illinois Bell Telephone CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1955
- Terry v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.