Legal Opinion
West Coast Advertising Co. v. City & County of San Francisco
California Supreme Court
Decided October 26, 1939No. S. F. 15949PublishedCited by 89 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.
The plaintiff sued the City and County of San Francisco to recover license taxes paid during the years 1933 to 1936, inclusive. The judgment was for the plaintiff, and the defendant has appealed.
During the period involved, the plaintiff was engaged in the business of outdoor advertising, as defined in ordinance No. 4059 (new series) adopted bjr the board of supervisors of the city and county and approved by the mayor in 1917. Pursuant to that ordinance as amended in 1920 by ordinance No. 5133 (new series), and ordinance No. 5132 (new series), entitled “An Ordinance imposing License Taxes on…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Butterworth v. BoydCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Civic Center Ass'n of Los Angeles v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Ex Parte BraunCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- City of Pasadena v. CharlevilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Fragley v. PhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by89 opinions
- Pipoly v. BensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Ayres v. City Council of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- California Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- Lindell Co. v. Board of Permit Appeals of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- In Re Redevelopment Plan for Bunker Hill v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
84 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.