Legal Opinion

Adams v. Doyle

California Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 1903No. Sac. No. 1179PublishedCited by 17 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

This is a proceeding in mandamus to compel the defendant, as auditor, to draw his warrant on the county treasurer for $202.05, claimed to be due the petitioner for his salary as sheriff of said county for the month of January, 1903. The court gave judgment in favor of petitioner, and the defendant appeals from the judgment.

The facts are as follows: At the general election in 1902 the petitioner and William Sweeney were each candidates for the office of sheriff of said county for the term commencing upon the first Monday after the first day of January, 1903. One Price was the incumbent of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Dorsey v. SmythCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
  2. People v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
  3. People Ex Rel. Barker v. ShaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Bannerman v. BoyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Anderson v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Klose v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  4. State ex rel. Chenoweth v. ActonMontana Supreme Court · 1904
  5. People Ex Rel. Mattison v. NyeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908

12 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