Blanchard v. Hartwell
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
This action is by a taxpayer to enjoin the city treasurer of Los Angeles and the city from paying the expenses of a certain board claiming to be a board of freeholders elected to prepare a charter for the city.
The city of Los Angeles already had a freeholders’ charter, which was approved by the legislature in January, 1889. In that year a board of freeholders was again elected which framed a new charter, which was submitted to the inhabitants of the city for their approval, but was rejected. In July of the present year another board was elected and formally qualified, and is proceeding to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Argenti v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Zottman v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
- Oakland Paving Co. v. HiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Hi-Voltage Wire Works, Inc. v. City of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
- St. Louis v. DorrSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State Board of Education v. LevitCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- Santa Clara County v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- People v. City of San BuenaventuraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Morrow v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Montgomery v. Board of Administration, Etc.California Court of Appeal · 1939
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.