Edwards

People v. Edwards

Good Law
1892 Cal. LEXIS 537·93 Cal. 153·28 P. 831
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 2, 1892No. 14046California1,713 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Paterson, J.

Quo warranto ex relatione T. J. Parsons to show by what warrant defendant exercises the office of fire commissioner.

The facts —about which there is no dispute — are as follows: Prior to 1878 the board of fire commissioners of the city and county of San Francisco consisted of five persons, chosen by the qualified voters of said city and county at general elections. On March 28, 1878, an act was passed by the legislature, and approved by the governor, which provided for a board of fire commissioners consisting of five members, three of whom should be appointed by the board of supervisors, one by the judge of the municipal criminal court, and one by the judge of the county court. The terms of three of the five members of the board elected under the act of 1874 expired on the first Monday of December, 1879, and the terms of the other two members expired on the first Monday of December, 1881. The last-named act provided that the judge of the municipal court and the judge of the county court should each appoint one commissioner in place of one of the three commissioners elected under the act of 1874. On the first Monday in December, 1879, the defendant was appointed a member of the…

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.