Legal Opinion

Ex Parte McKenna

California Supreme Court

Decided October 24, 1899No. Crim. No. 524PublishedCited by 31 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.

—The petitioner was arrested upon a complaint charging him with the offense of carrying on and conducting at the city of Fresno the business of selling trading stamps redeemable in money, merchandise, or other things, and so redeeming the same without the necessary license, contrary to the provisions of a city ordinance, et cetera. This charge is in the language of an ordinance of the city of Fresno imposing a license tax of two hundred dollars per quarter upon all persons carrying on such a business. The prisoner contends that the ordinance is oppressive, discriminating, prohibí íory, and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Ex parte HaskellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Ex Parte DanielsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  2. People v. VictorMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  3. City Council v. KellySupreme Court of Alabama · 1904
  4. Ex Parte DrexelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Young v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1903

26 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