Proll v. Dunn
California Supreme Court
Application to the Supreme Court for a writ of mandate to the controller of state. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.
This is an application by petitioner for a peremptory writ of mandate, directing the respondent, state controller, to draw his warrant in favor of the petitioner for the sum of $297.75, alleged to be due petitioner for supplies furnished to the state mining bureau for the forty-first fiscal year. The demand has been duly *221approved and audited by the board of trustees of said mining bureau and by the state board of examiners, and it is claimed that it is payable out of an appropriation provided for by an act of the last legislature, approved March 14, 1889, and entitled “An act making an…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ristine v. State ex rel. Board of Commissioners of the Sinking FundIndiana Supreme Court · 1863
- Fowler v. PeirceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1852
- Stratton v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Baggett v. DunnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Marshall v. DunnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by17 opinions
- Menefee, State Treas. v. AskewSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Humbert v. DunnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- State ex rel. Henderson v. BurdickWyoming Supreme Court · 1893
- INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 52 v. HOFMEISTERSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2020
- Shattuck v. KincaidOregon Supreme Court · 1897
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.