Legal Opinion

City of Oxnard v. Dale

California Supreme Court

Decided December 9, 1955No. L. A. 23700PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.

— Petitioner, a municipal corporation of the sixth class, seeks a writ of mandate requiring respondent city treasurer to sign, and respondent city clerk to countersign, certain revenue bonds which the city proposes to issue pursuant to the Revenue Bond Law of 1941. (Gov. Code, § 54300 et seq.) Mandamus is, of course, an appropriate remedy to compel respondents to sign the bonds, if the proposed issue meets the requirements of the law, since the acts demanded are ministerial duties. (Cf. City of Fairfield v. Hutcheon, 33 Cal.2d 475 [202 P.2d 745] ; California Toll Bridge Authority v. Kelly,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. In Re City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Garrett v. SwantonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Controversy Between California Toll Bridge Authority & City & County of San Francisco v. WentworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  4. California Toll Bridge Authority v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Shelton v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. New Jersey Sports & Exposition Authority v. McCraneSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1972
  2. California Housing Finance Agency v. ElliottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. California Educational Facilities Authority v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  4. City of Santa Clara v. Von RaesfeldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Richards v. City of MuscatineSupreme Court of Iowa · 1975

33 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