Legal Opinion
Carter v. Green
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 15, 1929No. Docket No. 6778PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
A proceeding in mandamus to compel respondents above named to call a special election in the city of Albany for the purpose of determining whether that city shall be consolidated with the city of Berkeley. The two cities are contiguous, the city of Berkeley having the greater population and the larger number of electors.
Section 2 of the Municipal Consolidation Act of 1913 (Stats. 1913, p. 577), provides as follows: “Whenever a petition signed by not less than one-fourth in number of the qualified electors of any municipal corporation, as shown by the registration of electors of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- People v. Town of OntarioCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Tulare Water Co. v. State Water CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Puterbaugh v. WadhamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Chester v. HallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Stockton & Visalia Railroad v. City of StocktonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Whittemore v. SeydelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- People v. City of BelmontCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Crowhurst v. GreenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Arterburn v. SummersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1962
- Crowhurst v. City CouncilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929