Aggeler

Aggeler v. Dominguez

Caution
1933 Cal. LEXIS 628·217 Cal. 429·19 P.2d 241
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 24, 1933Docket No. L.A. 13722.California2,642 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Curtis, J.

Plaintiffs are municipal judges of the city of Los Angeles, having been appointed to such offices by the Governor of this state pursuant to the authority vested in him by an act of the legislature creating four additional municipal judges in the Municipal Court of the City of Los Angeles. (Stats. 1931, p. 1537.) Said act became effective on August 14, 1931, and thereafter plaintiffs’ appointment followed and commissions of appointment were issued to them providing that they should hold office as municipal judges of the city of Los Angeles for the term prescribed by law. The defendant is the city clerk of said city of Los Angeles, and this action is brought by the plaintiffs to have it adjudged and decreed that the plaintiffs’ terms of office are for the period of six years after and from the date of the creation of said offices, and that the defendant be restrained and enjoined from preparing or issuing nomination petitions for plaintiffs’ said offices, or from receiving or filing nomination petitions affecting said offices, or from expending any funds of the city of Los Angeles in any of said matters, or in connection with any other matter affecting plaintiffs and their said…

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.