Legal Opinion

Franklin v. Peterson

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 28, 1948No. Civ. 16329PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhite, J.

This cause comes before us on an agreed statement on appeal (Rule 6, Rules on Appeal). It is a declaratory relief action wherein an attack is made upon the constitutionality of section 21.190 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code, being an amendment to article I, chapter 2 of said code. The section in question imposes a gross receipts tax upon persons engaged in various trades, callings, occupations, professions or other means of livelihood, in the sum of $12 per calendar year or fractional part thereof, for the first $12,000 or less of gross receipts, and in addition thereto the sum of one…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Philadelphia & Southern Steamship Co. v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. Miller v. Mun. Court of L. A.California Supreme Court · 1943
  3. West Coast Advertising Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Royall v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  5. In Re NowakCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. City of Los Angeles v. Belridge Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Lublin v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
  3. Weekes v. City of OaklandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  4. People v. GlaserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  5. City of Los Angeles v. Rancho Homes, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1953

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API