Legal Opinion
City of San Mateo v. Mullin
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 12, 1943No. Civ. 12373PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWard, J.
This is an action by plaintiff city against defendant, a practicing attorney-at-law, for the collection of a license tax fee due under the provisions of an ordinance of the city of San Mateo for a period from July 1, 1936 to June 30, 1940. Based upon a finding and conclusion of law that the tax was unconstitutional, judgment was rendered for defendant. The city appeals from the judgment.
In June 1932 the City Council of the City of San Mateo passed and adopted ordinance No. 373 entitled “San Mateo Business License Ordinance,” which in brief provides that persons engaged in businesses, trades,…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Carmichael v. Southern Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Madden v. Kentucky Ex Rel. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Bell's Gap Railroad v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Metropolis Theatre Co. v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Lawrence v. State Tax Comm'n of Miss.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Ainsworth v. BryantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Franklin v. PetersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- In Re GrovesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- 508 Chestnut, Inc. v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1965
- Redwood Theatres, Inc. v. City of ModestoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.