Legal Opinion

Sipper v. Urban

California Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1943No. L. A. 18567PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.

The petitioner filed in the superior court his application for the writ of mandamus to compel the respondent Real Estate Commissioner to vacate an order dated September 19, 1941, suspending his license from September 29, 1941, to and including October 9, 1941, or a period of ten days, and to set aside the findings on which the order of suspension was based. The record does not disclose the date of the filing of the original petition for the writ, but it is conceded that it was filed after the period of suspension had expired and the license of the petitioner presumably had been reinstated.

On…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wiedwald v. DodsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Bartholomae Oil Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Betty v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Newport v. CaminettiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. Moran v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Fukuda v. City of AngelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  3. California Correctional Peace Officers Ass'n. v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Faulkner v. California Toll Bridge AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Empire Star Mines Co. v. California Employment CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946

43 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