Harriman v. City of Beverly Hills
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.—
Statement of the Case
Plaintiffs filed their complaint wherein they challenged the constitutionality of ordinance number 1228, chapter 20 of title 6, enacted by the City Council of the City of Beverly Hills, hereinafter referred to as the City. Application for a preliminary injunction restraining the enforcement of the ordinance pending trial was denied. Upon trial the court rendered judgment sustaining the constitutionality of the ordinance and denying plaintiffs’ prayer for a permanent injunction enjoining the City from enforcing the provisions of the ordinance. The appeal is from…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Miller v. Board of Public Works of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- People v. Western Fruit GrowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Wollam v. City of Palm SpringsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- Ex Parte Quong WoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Pasadena Sch. Dist. v. City of PasadenaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cohen v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Olson v. City of West FargoNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981
- People v. OlagueAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1973
- Cohen v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- People v. OlagueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973