Legal Opinion

Stephens v. Richardson

California Supreme Court

Decided January 24, 1921No. S. F. No. 9677PublishedCited by 2 opinions

APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandamus requiring the State Treasurer to cancel unsold highway bonds. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

Petitioners pray for writ of mandate directed to the state treasurer requiring him to cancel certain bonds of the state of California prepared by him pursuant to the provisions of section 2 of article XVI of the constitution of the state of California, which authorized the issuance and sale of forty thousand bonds of one thousand dollars each. Petitioners' prayer is based upon the amendment to the constitution adopted by the people of the state at the election November 2, 1920, wherein a new section, number 3, was added to article XVI of the constitution, which provided, among other things,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Christensen v. CramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. StephensDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1922
  2. Ellis v. StephensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API