Legal Opinion

Holmes Investment Co. v. Board of Supervisors

California Supreme Court

Decided September 13, 1934No. S. F. 15244PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.

Mandamus proceeding presented by a petition and general demurrer thereto. The issue involved is the proper scope to be accorded the word “expenditures” found in article XI, section 20, of the Constitution, this section being a part of the so-called Riley-Stewart tax plan voted into the Constitution and made effective June 27, 1933.

The proper construction of this word will disclose the ingredient items which shall go to make up the net sum or “base” upon which the permitted increase of revenues for a given year over the preceding year or years is to be calculated. Petitioner is a taxpayer and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Crow v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Skelly Estate Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Los Angeles Gas & Electric Corp. v. City CouncilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  3. Skelly Estate Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API