Legal Opinion

Gregory v. Hecke

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 19, 1925No. Docket No. 2814PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMPSON, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment by default entered against defendant for failure to answer the petition for a writ of prohibition, after a general demurrer thereto had been overruled.

The writ prohibits appellant from proceeding pursuant to the provisions of the California Economic Poison Act of 1921 (Stats. 1921, p. 1259), to hear or revoke respondent’s license to manufacture and sell a compound known as ‘ ‘ QuaSul,” a germicide intended for the purpose of eradicating mildew, aphis, codlin-moth, germs and fungoid diseases of plants and trees.

The petition alleges that…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Hurtado v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  3. Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
  4. Hewitt v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Ex parte JentzschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Hughes v. Board of Architectural ExaminersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  2. Standard Oil Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Clemons v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Frankel v. Board of Dental ExaminersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
  5. Hart v. City of Beverly HillsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

24 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