Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mercury Herald Co. v. Moore

California Supreme Court

Decided June 1, 1943No. S. F. 16809Published

1DissentShenk, J.

I dissent. In my opinion the legislation under consideration provides for a shortening of the period of redemption fixed by the law in force at the time of the sale for delinquent taxes. The question whether the shortening of that period is a substantial impairment of the redemption-er’s right cannot be answered by the citation of cases which declare that the Legislature may change the method of re*286demption. It is not the method, but the period of redemption which is involved. Neither may it properly be said that the right of the redemptioner is amplified because he is given more notice when…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Biaggi v. RamontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Johnson v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. County of San Diego v. ChildsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Teralta Land & Water Co. v. ShafferCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  5. County of Los Angeles v. RockholdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935

6 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