Legal Opinion

Vitale v. City of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 8, 1936No. Civ. 10799PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GOULD, J., pro tem.

Under an ordinance of the City of Los Angeles plaintiff and his assignors paid to that municipality under protest various sums of money for liquor license stamps, both before and after December 5, 1933, the effective date of section 22, article XX of the Constitution of the state of California, which vested in the state the exclusive right and power, subject only to United States internal revenue laws, to control, license and regulate the liquor traffic. Decisions of this court prior to the commencement of this action had declared that as to dates before December 5, 1933,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ernst v. SearleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  2. McMillan v. RichardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
  3. Underwood Typewriter Co. v. ChamberlainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
  4. Los Angeles Brewing Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  5. City of Chicago v. Waukesha Imperial Spring Brewing Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1901

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Carmichael v. ReitzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  2. Ainsworth v. BryantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Barker Bros., Inc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Flynn v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Title Insurance. Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992

10 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