Legal Opinion

Cassidy v. Sullivan

California Supreme Court

Decided October 30, 1883PublishedCited by 22 opinions

Application for a writ of mandate. The facts are stated in the ouinion of the court.

1Per curiam

This is an application for a writ to compel the respondent, judge of the Superior Court, to have the issues of fact in a divorce case pending in said court tried by a jury. The clause of the Constitution mainly relied on reads as follows: “ The right of trial by jury shall be secured to all and remain inviolate.” (Const, art. i., § 7.) This implies the existence of the right. To secure is not to create or acquire, but “to make safe; to relieve from apprehensions of or exposure to danger; to guard, to protect.”—Webster. Under the provisions of other constitutions and statutes quite as broad as…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Koppikus v. State Capitol Comm'rsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. People v. PowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Grafton Partners L.P. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  3. In Re the Guardianship of CoburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Freeman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1915
  5. Union Oil Co. v. Reconstruction Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937

17 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