Thaxter v. Finn
California Supreme Court
MANDAMUS against the Sheriff of the City and County of San Francisco to compel the enforcement of a writ of execution issued upon a judgment upon an award of the Industrial Accident Commission. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. P. L. Benjamin, Christopher M. Bradley, and Warren H. Pillsbury, for Petitioner.
1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, C. J.
This is a proceeding instituted in this court to obtain a writ of mandate directed to defendant, requiring him to enforce against property of A. A. Janssen and the Aetna Life Insurance Company an execution issued by the clerk of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco upon a judgment entered in said court upon an award of the Industrial Accident Commission in favor of petitioner. The award of the commission was made in a proceeding regularly instituted and prosecuted by petitioner against one F. W. Thaxter, and also said Janssen and said Insurance Company, for compensation…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Carstens v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Donlon Bros. v. Indus. Accident Comm'n of Cal.California Supreme Court · 1916
- Sturdivant v. PillsburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- North P. S. S. Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com.California Court of Appeal · 1917
- Connolly v. Industrial Acc. CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Loustalot v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Solari v. Atlas-Universal Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1963
- Hawthorn v. City of Beverly HillsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Pratt v. Coast Trucking, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1964
- County of Sonoma v. State Energy Resources Conservation & Development CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.