Legal Opinion

Robinson v. Kerrigan

California Supreme Court

Decided April 5, 1907No. S.F. No. 4659PublishedCited by 55 opinions

APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandate to the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and to Frank H. Kerrigan, the Judge thereof. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Walter H. Robinson, and Robert T. Devlin, for Petitioner.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

This is an original proceeding in this court for a writ of mandate.

The plaintiff asks a writ to compel the defendant, as judge of the superior court, to make an order appointing a time for the hearing of a petition filed in the superior court to obtain registration of certain lands, as provided in the act of March 17, 1897, entitled “An act for the certification of land titles and the simplification of the transfer of real estate,” known as the “Torrens Law.” (Stats. 1897, p. 138.) The defendant refused to make the order, basing his refusal upon the ground that the act above mentioned is…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Arndt v. GriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  2. Tyler v. Judges of Court of RegistrationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
  3. Hellman v. ShoultersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Ex parte LiddellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Owners of Lands v. People ex rel. StookeyIllinois Supreme Court · 1885

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

3Cited by55 opinions

  1. Fair Political Practices Commission v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Anway v. Grand Rapids Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1920
  3. McDaniel v. McElvySupreme Court of Florida · 1926
  4. Perry v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Harbor v. DeukmejianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987

50 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