Reading v. Maxwell
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
— The plaintiff, E. J. Maxwell, seeks by mandamus to compel the defendants Edward Reading, Joe Rice and Wm. A. Baker, composing the civil service board of the city of Phoenix, and Y. R. Quintel, secretary of such board, to certify that his “status is that of clerk in the (city) water department” and to determine his seniority. The parties stipulated the facts and, upon such facts and the pleadings, the court rendered judgment for plaintiff making the alternative writ peremptory. The defendants have appealed from the judgment for the reason, as they assert, that it is not supported by the law…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Raines v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1925
- Paddock v. BrisboisArizona Supreme Court · 1929
- In re DarlingNew York Supreme Court · 1911
3Cited by6 opinions
- City of Birmingham v. LeeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
- Howe v. Civil Service Commission of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
- City of Phoenix v. SannerArizona Supreme Court · 1939
- Goodman v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County1940
- Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion, Texas Attorney General Reports1947
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.