In Re Lowenthal
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtTyler, P. J.
Habeas corpus. Petitioner was accused of the violation of a certain ordinance of the city of Fresno which imposes certain restrictions upon the sale of uncured and uncooked meats. On application to this court he was granted a writ of habeas corpus by which he seeks to have determined the legality of his arrest and detention. From the return filed herein it appears that petitioner was charged in the police court of the city of Fresno with the violation of Ordinance 1320 of said city as amended by Ordinance 1327 which declares in substance that it shall be unlawful and a misdemeanor, punishable…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- In Re HolmesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Boyd v. City of Sierra MadreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Ex parte KohlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by14 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Newman v. City of LaramieWyoming Supreme Court · 1929
- DeAryan v. ButlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Ganley v. ClaeysCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Salt Lake City v. ReveneUtah Supreme Court · 1942
- Justesen's Food Stores, Inc. v. City of TulareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.