Legal Opinion

People v. Tilkin

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 28, 1939PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

34 Cal.App.2d Supp. 743 (1939)

THE PEOPLE, Respondent,

v.

SOL TILKIN et al., Appellants;

California Court of Appeals.

April 28, 1939.

Gallagher, Wirin & Johnson for Appellants.

Ray L. Chesebro, City Attorney, W. Joseph McFarland, Assistant City Attorney, and John L. Bland, Deputy City Attorney, for Respondent.

Bishop, J.

We have reached the conclusion that there is a fundamental difference between the form and the substance of those provisions of the recently adopted initiative ordinance of Los Angeles city (ordinance number 80170) dealing with picketing, and that, as the complaints on which the…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Morrison v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. Roller v. HollySupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  3. Western & Atlantic Railroad v. HendersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  4. State v. AbbeySupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
  5. Cypress Lawn Cemetery Ass'n v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. BellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Fletcher v. PorterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  3. Sunset Realty Co. v. DadmunCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  4. People v. GidalyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API