Legal Opinion
Austin v. Upjohn
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 31, 1933No. Docket No. 7746PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.
A contract with Pacific Electric Railway Company, a corporation, was entered into by Pasadena City High School District for the transportation of school children. The facts are fully set out in Pasadena City High School Dist. v. Upjohn, 206 Cal. 775 [276 Pac. 341, 343, 63 A. L. R. 408], and the requisition for compensation under such contract was regularly approved and presented to the County Superintendent of Schools and the County Auditor refused to honor it in part. Some time after the contract had expired the district requested the county counsel to institute mandamus proceedings against…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pasadena City High School District v. UpjohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Bartlett v. BellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
3Cited by4 opinions
- Jaynes v. StocktonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- City of Roseville v. TulleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- School District No. One of Pima County v. LohrCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1972
- Evans v. BuchananDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1979