City of Sacramento v. Adams
California Supreme Court
APPLICATIONS for writs of mandate directed to the Auditor of the City of Sacramento. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Devlin & Devlin, and Downey, Pullen & Downey, for Petitioners.
1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, C. J.
These are original applications to this court for peremptory writs of mandamus against the city auditor of the city of Sacramento to compel the performance by him of the same acts, viz., to attest and sign certain bonds of the city, the issuance of which has been authorized and directed by the appropriate boards and officers of the city, and by vote of the electors of said city at an election regularly called and held for that purpose. The Peltier case was inaugurated by a taxpayer of the city, and the other case by the city itself and the city commission solely to avoid all question as to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Fragley v. PhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Lancey v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1896
- Schneck v. City of JeffersonvilleIndiana Supreme Court · 1898
- Clouse v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Low v. Mayor & Common Council of MarysvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. HamiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- County of San Diego v. HammondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- County of Los Angeles v. GravesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- McNichols v. City of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1937
- State ex rel. Board of Commissioners v. ClausenWashington Supreme Court · 1917
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.