Quigg v. Evans
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Humboldt County. G-. W. Hunter, Judge. The facts are stated, in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, C.
Mandamus. The facts are agreed. Plaintiff was duly appointed and commissioned harbor master of the port of Eureka, Humboldt county, June 2, 1897, by the governor, and he duly qualified June 9th and entered upon the performance of his duties as such harbor master, and is still performing said duties; on June 12th the board of harbor commissioners duly made and entered its order fixing the fees of said harbor master at two dollars and fifty cents for each day’s work as such; he performed certain services between June 9, 1897, and August 1, 1897, amounting to one hundred and twelve…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. LynchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- John Hoagland v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877
3Cited by8 opinions
- Tevis v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Ex Parte GerinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Patton v. Board of Health Etc.California Supreme Court · 1899
- City of Los Angeles v. GurdaneCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932
- Ex Parte MauchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.