Legal Opinion

Clinton Construction Co. v. Clay

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 13, 1917No. Civ. No. 2163PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtKerrigan, J.

Petitioner herein sought and obtained a writ of mandarines against the auditor of the city of Oakland, commanding him to draw his warrant in favor of petitioner for the sum of $3,763.96, payable out of a certain fund raised by a bond issue and known as the “Clawson School Construction Fund.” This appeal is from such judgment.

Appellant justifies his refusal to issue such warrant upon the ground that the amount for which it is sought to have the warrant drawn represents expenditures by the board of education of the city of Oakland in excess of the sum of five hundred dollars, and which…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Zottman v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Reams v. CooleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Ely v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Auditor General v. StoddardMichigan Supreme Court · 1907

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. East Bay Garbage Co. v. Washington Township Sanitation Co.California Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Nightingale v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  3. City of Lubbock v. Geo. L. Simpson & Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1930
  4. Strauch v. San Mateo Junior College DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API