Los Angeles Title Insurance v. City of Los Angeles
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Chas. S. Burnell, City Attorney, Jess E. Stephens, City Attorney, Wm. P. Mealey, Assistant City Attorney, and Julius V. Patrosso, Deputy City Attorney, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtConrey, P. J.
From the complaint in this action it appears that the city council of the city of Los Angeles adopted an ordinance providing for licensing and regulating the carrying on of certain professions, trades, callings, and occupations. It was provided in the ordinance that on and after January 1, 1920, it shall be unlawful for any person, etc., to carry .on any of said occupations without having first procured a license from the city so to do. Certain fees are to be paid for each license. Among the businesses specified is that of searching titles to real property and issuing abstracts, statements,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Cotting v. Kansas City Stock Yards Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Sullivan v. San Francisco Gas Etc. Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ex Parte PharesTexas Supreme Court · 1932
- State Ex Rel. Potter v. MayburyWashington Supreme Court · 1931
- Walsh v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Fairchild v. BrockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Gospel Army v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.