Legal Opinion

Whitcomb Hotel, Inc. v. California Employment Commission

California Supreme Court

Decided August 18, 1944No. S. F. 16854PublishedCited by 182 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTraynor, J.

In this proceeding the operators of the Whitcomb Hotel and of the St. Francis Hotel in San Francisco seek a writ of mandamus to compel the California Employment Commission to set aside its order granting unemployment insurance benefits to two of their former employees, Fernando R. Nidoy and Betty Anderson, corespondents in this action, and to restrain the commission from charging petitioners’ accounts with benefits paid pursuant to *755that order. Nidoy had been employed as a dishwasher at the Whitcomb Hotel, and Betty Anderson as a maid at the St. Francis Hotel. Both lost their employment but…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Helvering v. HallockSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Manhattan General Equipment Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  3. Fawcus MacHine Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  4. Iselin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  5. Koshland v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1936

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

3Cited by182 opinions

  1. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Morris v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Wildlife Alive v. ChickeringCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  5. People v. NavarroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972

177 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