Legal Opinion

Hammond v. McDonald

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 11, 1942No. Civ. 13086PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHAW, J. pro tem.

This is an action brought by the plaintiff as a citizen and resident of the county of Los Angeles, to abate a nuisance consisting of a place in said county used by the defendants, it is alleged, for the unlawful sale and service of intoxicating liquor. The action purports to be brought under a statute of 1915 (Stats. 1915, p. 236; Deering’s General Laws, 1937 ed., Act 3778), which in terms authorizes such an action to be brought by any citizen of the county where the nuisance exists. On a former appeal in this action it was held that the statute just referred to was not…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. People v. OtteyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Carter v. Commission on Qualifications of Judicial AppointmentsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Kaiser v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Wheeler v. HerbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Crowe v. BoyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Merrill v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Tomaier v. TomaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Covert v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Mosk v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Stockton Theatres, Inc. v. PalermoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956

33 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