Luchsinger v. Rolph
Albert G. Luchsinger, Etc. v. James Rolph, Jr.
- Outcome
- writ granted — PROCEEDING in Mandamus to require the levy and collection of a tax sufficient to pay a judgment against a municipality. Writ granted. The facts are the same as those stated in the opinion in Oscar Heyman Brother (a Corporation) v. Edwin C. Bath et al., ante, p. 499.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- The Court. — (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
[1] Let a peremptory writ issue as prayed on the authority ofOscar Heyman Brother (a Corporation) v. Edwin C. Bath et al.,ante, p. 499 [208 P. 981].
A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on September 7, 1922.
All the Justices present concurred.
Richards, J., pro tem., and Myers, J., pro tem., were acting. *Page 790
Cites, in this corpus
- Oscar Heyman Brother v. Bath Civ. No. 4309. · 1922-07-11