Legal Opinion

Welsh v. Bramlet

California Supreme Court

Decided May 8, 1893No. 14832PublishedCited by 34 opinions

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County denying a writ of mandate. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.

— The appellant was appointed assistant district attorney of Fresno County on the first day of April, 1891, by virtue of the provisions of subdivision 21, section 170 of the County Government Act, passed March 31, 1891. He entered upon the duties of his office, and on the third day of July, 1891, made a demand upon the respondent, as county auditor, that he draw a warrant on the county treasury in his favor for the sum of two hundred dollars, as his salary during the month of June. The respondent refusing to comply, the appellant instituted this proceeding for a writ of mandate compelling him…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Cody v. MurpheyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Longan v. County of SolanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  3. County of San Luis Obispo v. GravesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Coulter v. PoolCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  2. McGlothlen v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  3. City of Tulare v. HevrenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Irwin v. County of YubaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Marsh v. HanlyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

29 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