Legal Opinion

Trumbo v. Crestline Lake Arrowhead Water Agency

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 21, 1967No. Civ. 8324PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTamura, J.

The Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency is a public entity created by a special act of the Legislature (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) 1 and activated by a vote of the qualified electors. At a bond election held on June 15, 1965, the voters authorized the agency to issue general obligation bonds totalling seven and one-half million dollars. Petitioners, who are residents, property owners, and qualified voters within the agency, sought a writ of mandate in the superior court challenging both the procedural validity of the bond election, as well as the substantive power of the agency…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. In re the Bonds of the Madera Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Wisconsin & Michigan Railway Co. v. PowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
  3. Cedars of Lebanon Hospital v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Metropolitan Water Dist. v. MarquardtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Clark v. City of Los AngeLesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. County of Fresno v. MalmstromCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  2. Trent Meredith, Inc. v. City of OxnardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  3. Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency v. AmrheinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. Eastern Municipal Water District v. ScottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  5. Torres v. Laramie County School District No. 1Wyoming Supreme Court · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API