Cary v. Long
California Supreme Court
PROCEEDING in Mandamus to compel city officials to provide for payment of judgment against municipality. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
In this case the following opinion, prepared by Mr. Justice Richards, was filed in the district court of appeal of the first appellate district, division one.
‘ ‘ Application for a writ of mandate, whereby the petitioner seeks to have the respondents, who are the properly constituted officials of the city of Richmond, commanded to include in the tax levy of said city for the current year, an amount sufficient to pay a, judgment which the petitioner holds against said city for the sum of seventeen thousand dollars with interest.
11 The facts out of which the claim of said petitioner,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- City of Long Beach v. LisenbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. DeasyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
3Cited by8 opinions
- Taylor v. CraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- City of Vista v. Sutro & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. RolphCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Le Clerg v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Cruzen v. Boise CityIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.