Legal Opinion
Kennedy v. McInturff
California Supreme Court
Decided March 16, 1933No. Docket No. L.A. 13919PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment for the respondent in a mandamus proceeding brought to compel the treasurer of the Stratford Public Utility District in Kings County to pay a warrant in the sum of $1625 drawn on the order of the board of directors of the district, and payable to the petitioner.
The cause was submitted to the trial court on an agreed statement of facts from which it appears that the Stratford Public Utility District was organized and is functioning under the act of 1921 (Stats. 1921, p. 906). Under the act the respondent county treasurer is made the acting treasurer of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mayor, Etc., of N.Y. v. . SandsNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Appeal of WhelenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885
- Armstrong v. . Village of Ft. EdwardNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Smith v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Consolidated School District No. 20 ex rel. Thompson v. Union Trust Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1923
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Connerly v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Bayha v. Public Utility District No. 1Washington Supreme Court · 1939
- Opinion No. (2005), California Attorney General Reports2005