Legal Opinion

Stanson v. Mott

California Supreme Court

Decided June 22, 1976No. L.A. 30567PublishedCited by 156 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

TOBRINER, J.

On June 4, 1974, California voters approved a $250 million bond issue to provide funds for the future acquisition of park land and recreational and historical facilities by state and municipal authorities. One day before the election, plaintiff Sam Stanson filed the present taxpayer suit, alleging that defendant William Penn Mott, Jr., Director of the California Department of Parks and Recreation (department), had authorized the department to expend more than $5,000 of public funds to promote the passage of the bond issue. Asserting the illegality of such use of public…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  3. United States Civil Service Commission v. National Ass'n of Letter CarriersSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Healy v. JamesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Muskopf v. Corning Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961

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

3Cited by156 opinions

  1. Smith v. DorseyMississippi Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Van Atta v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Weatherford v. City of San RafaelCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  4. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. County of StanislausCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Vargas v. City of SalinasCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009

151 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