Legal Opinion
In Re Brambini
California Supreme Court
Decided September 13, 1924No. Crim. No. 2558. Crim. No. 2559. S. F. No. 10623. S. F. No. 10624PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilbur, C. J.
The above-entitled matters, which for convenience may be considered together, involve an attack by writ of review and by habeas corpus upon a judgment for contempt for violating preliminary injunctions or restraining orders of the superior court of Humboldt County issued in proceedings to abate nuisances consisting of places maintained by the petitioners for the keeping and sale of intoxicating liquors. The abatement proceedings were begun December 12, 1922, after the election of 1922, whereat the people of the state upon referendum ratified the Wright Act of California (Stats. 1921, p. 79),…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Second Employers'liability CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- O'Brien v. People ex rel. Kellogg Switchboard & Supply Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1905
- Franklin Union No. 4 v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1906
- Hotaling v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Frowley v. Superior Court of ModocCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Bridges v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Oil Workers International Union v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Safer v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Traffic Truck Sales Co. v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Commercial Bank of Spanish America, Ltd. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.