Legal Opinion

Ex parte Ah You

California Supreme Court

Decided January 1, 1890No. 20586PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Application for a writ of habeas corpus. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

The Court.

This is a proceeding upon habeas corpus. The facts out of which the case arises are stipulated as follows: —

“ 1. That on the fourteenth day of February, 1889, a charter (framed and adopted in accordance with constitutional amendment No. 16, approved March 10, 1887, *340statutes of 1887, page 88) became and ever since has been and now is the organic law of the city of Oakland.
“2. That at a municipal election duly and regularly h eld in the city of Oakland, under the provisions of said charter, one Alexander Laidlaw received certain votes, being a majority of all the votes cast for police…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. People ex rel. Daniels v. HenshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Davies v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  3. State ex rel. City of Seattle v. CarsonWashington Supreme Court · 1893
  4. In re MitchellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. State of California v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1948

12 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