Mitchell v. Board of Education
California Supreme Court
DISMISSAL of appeals from judgments of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. William R. Daingerfield, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Franklin K. Lane, City Attorney, and W. I. Brobeck, Assistant City Attorney, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Motions are made to dismiss the appeals herein upon the ground that no undertaking upon appeal has been filed in either of the cases, and that no order of the trial court has been made dispensing with the giving of them.
Section 1058 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that “In any civil action or proceeding wherein the state, or the people of the state, is a party plaintiff, or any state officer, in his official capacity, or in behalf of the state, or any county, city and county, city, or town, is a party plaintiff or defendant, no bond, written undertaking, or security can be required of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kennedy v. MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Kennedy v. Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Brown v. Board of Education of City of PomonaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- People ex rel. Fries v. Supervisors of Marin Cty.California Supreme Court · 1858
- Raisch v. Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Leymel v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Ward v. San Diego School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Los Angeles School Dist. v. LongdenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Anglo California Trust Co. v. KellyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Barthel v. Bd. of Educ. of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.