Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Stolzoff

Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California

Decided October 10, 1945No. Crim. A. No. 126117; Crim. A. No. 126115; Crim. A. No. 126116Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBurch, J.

I dissent. I think the conviction of the defendants should be reversed, as was decided by the court on the original hearing. I will say a few words in amplification of the opinion there rendered.

The majority opinion on rehearing sufficiently and correctly sets out the facts. I agree, too, that the first inquiry is to measure the defendants’ acts by the appropriate statutes and to this end we should discover the meaning of the term “passenger stage corporation.” I wholly disagree with the reasoning and the construction adopted by the majority to this end. It is true that the term was brought…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. St. Joseph Stock Yards Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Comm'n of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. Allen v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Southern Pacific Co. v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Truck Owners & Shippers, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924

8 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