Legal Opinion

County of Kern v. Fay

California Supreme Court

Decided February 12, 1901No. L.A. No. 795PublishedCited by 12 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.

The defendant Fay was the district attorney of Kern county from the first Monday of January, 1895, to the first Monday of January, 1899, and the other defendants were sureties on his official bond as required by law.

The action is to recover the sum of six hundred and thirty dollars, moneys alleged to have been collected by the defendant Fay as such district attorney, and to have been unlawfully re-r famed by him.

After a demurrer of the defendant Fay to the complaint had been overruled, he filed an answer containing a general denial of the allegations in plaintiffs complaint. For the purpose…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. HamiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  2. People ex rel. Dunn v. BunkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  3. McKee v. Monterey CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. County of Humboldt v. SternCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Matter of DodgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  3. City of Sacramento v. SimmonsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  4. Parker v. LawsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1970
  5. Humiston v. ShafferCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904

7 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