Fascination, Inc. v. Hoover
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCarter, J.
Defendants appeal from a judgment granting a writ of mandate commanding them to issue a license to plaintiff, a corporation, to conduct an amusement busi ness consisting of a game called “fascination” in the city of Long Beach. Defendants are Hoover, the city tax collector, Dovey, chief of police, and Sutherland, city prosecutor.
There are certain ordinances of the City of Long Beach covering the issuance of licenses to operate amusement games and other businesses. It appears that before a person may engage in business in said city he must obtain a license therefor from the city tax collector…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Covert v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- McDonough v. GoodcellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Lloyd Sabaudo Societa Anonima Per Azioni v. EltingSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Cason v. Glass Bottle Blowers Assn.California Supreme Court · 1951
- Steen v. Board of Civil Service CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by91 opinions
- Bixby v. PiernoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn.California Supreme Court · 1974
- City of Fairfield v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Conti v. Board of Civil Service CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Endler v. SchutzbankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.