Legal Opinion · Dissent

County of Alpine v. County of Tuolumne

California Supreme Court

Decided March 7, 1958No. Sac. 6654Published

1DissentTraynor, J.

I dissent.

Sections 23171-23175 of the Government Code provide an administrative procedure and sections 51000-51009 of that code provide a judicial procedure for determining disputed boundaries. Plaintiff was therefore entitled in the first instance to invoke one procedure or the other. (City of Susanville v. Lee C. Hess Co., 45 Cal.2d 684, 689 [290 P.2d 520]; Scripps Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. California Emp. Com., 24 Cal.2d 669, 673 [151 P.2d 109, 155 A.L.R. 360]; see River Plate & Brazil Conferences v. Pressed Steel Car Co., 227 F.2d 60, 64.) Since it elected to proceed before the State…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Bodinson Manufacturing Co. v. California Employment CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. United States v. Interstate Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Moran v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Drummey v. State Board of Funeral Directors & EmbalmersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Laisne v. California State Board of OptometryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942

23 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