Reynolds v. State Board of Equalization
California Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
SHENK, J., Concurring and Dissenting.
I favor a reconsideration of one important phase of this case and will State my reasons.
I am in accord with the application in this and in the companion case of Covert v. State Board of Equalization, ante, p. 125 [173 P.2d 545], of our constitutional provision (art. XX, § 22) which prohibits the consumption of intoxicating liquors in any public saloon or public barroom, but provides that sales for consumption on the premises may be made in bona fide hotels, restaurants, or other public eating places. These provisions are not capable of misunderstanding and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People v. California Fish Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
- Covert v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- People Ex Rel. Bledsoe v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Ross v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Martello v. Superior Court of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.