Legal Opinion

Hicks v. Frazer

Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California

Decided July 16, 1931No. C. A. No. 731PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, Acting P. J.

The evidence clearly shows that the defendant was campaign manager for Jack Bean, a candidate at the general election of 1928 for the office of supervisor of Los Angeles County, and in that capacity ordered from plaintiff printing to be used and which was used in the Jack Bean campaign. Plaintiff was fully informed as to this situation and the intended use of the printing. Plaintiff furnished on this order printing for which the total bill was. $1653.37, of which $1,000 remains unpaid. All of these facts appear without conflict.

By the provisions of section 3 of the Purity of Elections Law…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Olson v. CunninghamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  2. State ex rel. La Follette v. KohleeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Bradley v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Pacific Ready-Cut Homes, Inc. v. SeeberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Gardner v. KinneyOregon Supreme Court · 1911

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Chen v. D'AmicoDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API