From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Angus v. Plum

Supreme Court of California
Aug 3, 1898
121 Cal. 608 (Cal. 1898)

Opinion

         APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Charles W. Slack, Judge.

         COUNSEL:

         Aylett R. Cotton, W. C. Burnett, and L. G. Burnett, for Appellants.

         Pierson & Mitchell, and Garrett W. McEnerney, for Respondents.


         JUDGES: In Bank. Temple, J., dissented.

         OPINION

         THE COURT

         The judgment in this case must be affirmed on the authority of San Gabriel Co. v. Witmer Co ., 96 Cal. 623. The clause of the constitution upon which the rights of parties depend was construed in that case, and the court was very evenly divided. We are now asked to overrule the decision then made, but, whether that decision was right or wrong, it has been since acted upon, and was acted upon by the parties to this controversy, and we consider that it is protected by the rule of stare decisis .

         Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Angus v. Plum

Supreme Court of California
Aug 3, 1898
121 Cal. 608 (Cal. 1898)
Case details for

Angus v. Plum

Case Details

Full title:J. S. ANGUS et al., Respondents, v. CHARLES M. PLUM et al., Appellants

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Aug 3, 1898

Citations

121 Cal. 608 (Cal. 1898)
54 P. 97

Citing Cases

William Ede Co. v. Heywood

Appellant relies strongly upon the case of San Gabriel Co. v. Witmer Company, 96 Cal. 623, [29 P. 500, 31 P.…

State of California v. Superior Court

Finally the respondent asserts that where a statute has been construed by an appellate court and parties have…