City of Los Angeles v. Teed
California Supreme Court
Application in the Supreme Court for a writ of man- . date to the president of the City Council of Los Angeles» The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Fleet, J.
This is an original application to this court for a writ of mandate to require the defendant, as president of the council of the city of Los Angeles, to sign certain bonds alleged to have been authorized by said council and the voters of the city. The defendant demurs to the petition, on the grounds that the acts of the legislature under which the bonds are attempted to be issued are unconstitutional, that the same have been repealed, and that the proceedings prescribed by law for the issuance of the bonds have not been taken by the council.
The case has not been as fully argued as its…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- City of Pasadena v. StimsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Doon Township v. CumminsSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Hotchkiss v. MarionMontana Supreme Court · 1892
- Board of Commissioners v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
- Yarnell v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- Waite v. Santa CruzSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Hellman v. ShoultersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- In Re PfahlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Schwab v. Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1946
- City of Huron v. Second Ward Sav. BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1898
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.