Legal Opinion

Murphy v. Department of Motor Vehicles

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 4, 1978No. Civ. 19506PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

THE COURT.

Upon being arrested for drunk driving, Murphy refused to submit to any of the chemical tests required by the implied consent law which led to suspension of his driving privilege for the statutory period,. Murphy appeals from the denial below of his petition for writ of mandate.

Murphy claims to earn his. living as a truck driver. The heart of his complaint is that the suspension of the driving privilege under the implied consent law makes no exception to allow occupational driving and therefore Murphy not only is to lose his driving privilege but he also will lose his right to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Walker v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  2. Anderson v. CozensCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  3. Cook v. BrightCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. Pepin v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Porter v. JensenNebraska Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Foster v. SnyderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  3. Kellum v. THORNEYCROFT, ETC.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1982
  4. Zink v. GourleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  5. Foster v. SnyderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999

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

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

Powered by the Exa API