Legal Opinion
Irvine v. Citrus Pest District No. Two
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 17, 1944No. Civ. 3259PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarks, J.
This is an action to test the constitutionality of the “Citrous Pest District Control Act" (Stats. 1939, ch. 89; Deering’s Gen. Laws, 1939 Supp., Act 130) which we will refer to as “the act." The cause was heard on an agreed statement of facts. Judgment went for defendants and this appeal followed.
It was agreed that the Citrus Pest Control District Number Two of San Bernardino County (hereinafter referred to as the district) and the individual defendants had functioned in exact accordance with the provisions of and powers granted in the act and had acted fairly and honestly in administering…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Nebbia v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Parker v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Fallbrook Irrigation District v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Illinois ex rel. Drainage CommissionersSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- United States v. Ju ToySupreme Court of the United States · 1905
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Anderson v. Twin City Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Wheeler v. GreggCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Greif v. DulleaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Smith v. General Truck Drivers, Etc., Union Local 467District Court, S.D. California · 1960
- Thain v. City of Palo AltoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.