Nicholson v. Amar
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtStephens, P. J.
This is an appeal upon a proceeding in mandamus tried in the superior court. Petitioner appeals after an adverse decision.
Petitioner was for several years an employed official in the harbor department of the city of Los Angeles. During his service he took no vacation for several years, notwithstanding he was entitled thereto under the following provision of the city charter: “Sec. 426. Every person who shall have been in the service of the city, continuously, for one year, shall be allowed a vacation of two weeks on full pay, annually.” Upon his leaving the s'ervice, and after having been…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Boothby v. Atlas Mechanical, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1992
- Adams v. City of ModestoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Rivera Maldonado v. Autoridad Sobre HogaresSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1963
- Lim v. Motor Supply, Ltd.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1961
- Bonn v. California State University, ChicoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.