Jacks

Jacks v. Taylor

Good Law
1917 Cal. App. LEXIS 7·34 Cal. App. 95·166 P. 858
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 12, 1917Civ. No. 2019.California1,019 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

This is a proceeding in mandamus. The petitioner in the court below will hereafter be referred to as the plaintiff, and the respondent in that court as the appellant.

This controversy was before this court on a previous occasion in a proceeding in which the same relief was sought, by the same plaintiff against the same defendant, the title of the case being identical with this case. (See Jacks v. Taylor, 24 Cal. App. 667 , [ 142 Pac. 121 ].)

The facts of the controversy as they stood at the time that case was decided were fully stated in the opinion therein, and for those facts reference may be had thereto.

Since that decision further action by the board of supervisors of Monterey County has made new issues in the matter; the former case has apparently been abandoned, and upon the new issues raised in this action plaintiff had judgment in the superior court commanding the defendant to pay him $350 out of the county treasury. From this judgment the defendant prosecutes this appeal.

The facts additional to those recited in the former opinion are that on the going down of the remittitur in that case the claim of plaintiff was again presented to the board of supervisors, who…

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.