Denman

Denman v. Webster

Good Law
1902 Cal. LEXIS 908·7 Cal. Unrep. 65·70 P. 1063
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 16, 1902S. F. No. 3057California1,559 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Haynes, J.

Appellant applied to the superior court of said city and county for a writ of mandate requiring the defendant, as such superintendent of schools, to draw his requisition upon the auditor of said city and county for the sum of $500, to be paid to appellant upon the order of the board of education. The defendant demurred to the petition, the demurrer was sustained, the writ denied, and the petitioner appeals.

*67 The circumstances under which appellant’s said services were rendered, as alleged in his petition, were that in October, 1900, the respondent, as superintendent of schools in said city and county, sued out an alternative writ of mandate to compel the board of education “to admit to its deliberations one W. D. Kingsbury”; that the said board of education made its order upon the city attorney requiring his services in its defense in said proceeding so brought against it; that “the city attorney, denying his jurisdiction to render said services,” refused to render the same, and that the board of education thereafter employed appellant to defend it in said proceeding, and that he did defend said board and continued to do so until March 25, 1901, when judgment was rendered…

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.