Dittus

Dittus v. Cranston

Good Law
186 Cal. App. 2d 837·1960 Cal. App. LEXIS 1703·9 Cal. Rptr. 314
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 28, 1960Civ. 10038California1,337 words

Opinion

Opinion

Van Dyke, J.

This is an original proceeding in mandamus commenced by the Secretary of the State Board of Control to compel the State Controller to draw a warrant in her favor in the amount of $12,550. The Budget Act of 1959 (Stats. 1959, chap. 1300) appropriated the sum of $240,599 to be paid from the general fund to petitioner herein. She presented her claim to respondent and it was honored except with respect to two items with only one of which we are here concerned. The refusal of respondent to honor the petitioner’s claim with respect to this item was based upon contentions that its expenditure would constitute an unconstitutional use of public funds. The decisional rule which must govern us in considering these contentions is stated in Dittus v. Cranston, 53 Cal.2d 284, 286 [ 1 Cal.Rptr. 327 , 347 P.2d 671 ], as follows:

Stevenson v. Colgan, 91 Cal. 649 [ 27 P. 1089 , 25 Am.St.Rep. 230 , 14 L.R.A. 459 ], presents a striking parallel to the case before us. The legislation there in question was an act entitled “An act for the relief of Jonathan D. Stevenson, and to appropriate money therefor.” The body of the act appropriated a sum of money payable to Stevenson and when Stevenson was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.