People v. Muehe
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtCraig, Acting P. J.
The appellant by its attorney-general instituted in the county of Los Angeles a proceed- mg in quo warranto upon relation of certain citizens and" taxpayers of the city of Azusa, a city of the sixth class, praying that respondents be required to show cause why they should occupy the office and exercise the powers of city trustees of said city, and that they be excluded from office as such trustees. Judgment was rendered decreeing that respondents were each legally entitled to the office of city trustee, and that each was a duly and regularly constituted and acting member of said board. The…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Nichols v. . MacLeanNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- People Ex Rel. Bledsoe v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- State ex rel. Kenosha Gas & Electric Co. v. Kenosha Electric Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- State ex rel. McNulty v. PorterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
- Hurd v. BeckSupreme Court of Kansas · 1896
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 53 PeoplesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- Citizens Utilities Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- P. ex rel. Internat. Assn. of Firefighters v. City of Palo AltoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024