Legal Opinion

Earhart v. Frohmiller

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided March 14, 1947No. 4979PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Per curiam

Petitioners seek a writ of mandamus compelling the State Auditor to allow and the State Treasurer to pay claims for subsistence and lodging expenses in accordance with the provisions of Chap. 16 (H.B. 103). This bill was enacted by the Eighteenth Legislature on February 28, 1947, over the vote of the Governor, with an emergency clause attached. That part of the bill necessary to this opinion reads as follows: “Section 1. Reimbursement of members of legislature. Any member or employee and officer of the legislature, while absent from his usual place of residence in the service of the state…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Sharpless v. Mayor of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853
  2. Collins v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Peay v. NolanTennessee Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Fitts v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  5. State Ex Rel. Todd v. YelleWashington Supreme Court · 1941

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Adams v. BolinArizona Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Hart v. Bayless Investment & Trading CompanyArizona Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Arizona Podiatry Ass'n v. Director of InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Cave Creek Unified School District v. DuceyArizona Supreme Court · 2013
  5. Eberle v. NielsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1957

44 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