Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Clark v. Boyce

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided November 4, 1919No. Civil No. 1740PublishedCited by 23 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of7 Maricopa. S. L. Pattee, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.

This is an action in mandamus brought by appellant, as deputy land commissioner, to compel appellee as state auditor to issue a voucher in appellant’s favor for his salary as provided for in chapter 160, Session Laws of 1919.

It appears that the Attorney General, having advised the auditor that said chapter did not become a law because it was not signed by the Governor, the auditor, acting upon such advice, refused to O. K. the demanded salary. Chapter 160 as published in the Laws of 1919 contains this notation:

“This bill having remained with the Governor ten days, Sundays excluded, after the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Biggs v. McBrideOregon Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Harpending v. HaightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  3. Gherna v. StateArizona Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Hoag v. Washington-Oregon Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1914
  5. State ex rel. Davis v. OsborneArizona Supreme Court · 1912

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Kilpatrick v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Roberts v. SprayArizona Supreme Court · 1950
  3. State Ex Rel. Jones v. LockhartArizona Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Porter v. HallArizona Supreme Court · 1928
  5. McBride v. KerbyArizona Supreme Court · 1927

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API