Legal Opinion
Brown v. State Personnel Board
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 17, 1941No. Civ. 12734PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.
It having been adjudged that a writ of mandate should issue to the state board of equalization directing that petitioners be reinstated to their several positions and be paid their accrued salaries from the dates of their wrongful dismissals, appellants take this appeal. In order more successfully to enforce the judgment the State Personnel Board and certain officers of both boards were joined in the action.
Petitioners are seven in number. Prior to appointment each was certified as eligible for his position by the personnel board. In the case of each of them, except petitioner Hudelson, a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- American National Bank of San Francisco v. A. G. Sommerville, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1923
- Hayman v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Neuwald v. BrockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Wolpert v. GriptonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- La Shells v. HenchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Conti v. Board of Civil Service CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Anderson v. AlexanderOregon Supreme Court · 1951
- Conti v. Board of Civil Service CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Austin v. Hallmark Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Wiles v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.