From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beecham v. Burns

Court of Appeal of California, Second District
Oct 4, 1917
34 Cal.App. 804 (Cal. Ct. App. 1917)

Opinion

Civ. No. 2388.

October 4, 1917.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Curtis D. Wilbur, Judge.

The facts are similar to those stated in Beecham v. Burns, ante, p. 754, [ 168 P. 1058].

Charles W. Lyon, and Fredericks Hanna, for Appellant.

Roy A. Linn, Muhleman Crump, and William M. Humphreys, for Respondent.


This is said to be an action to compel appellant, as city clerk of the city of Venice, to certify to the sufficiency of a certain recall petition for the recall of one Carlos L. Smart, a trustee of that city. In all respects necessary to be considered for the purposes of a decision, this case is like No. 2387, Beecham v. Burns, ante, p. 754, [ 168 P. 1058], in which our decision is this day filed. Upon the authority of that decision, the judgment in this action is affirmed.


Summaries of

Beecham v. Burns

Court of Appeal of California, Second District
Oct 4, 1917
34 Cal.App. 804 (Cal. Ct. App. 1917)
Case details for

Beecham v. Burns

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM E. BEECHAM, Respondent, v. C. Y. BURNS, City Clerk, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Second District

Date published: Oct 4, 1917

Citations

34 Cal.App. 804 (Cal. Ct. App. 1917)
168 P. 419

Citing Cases

Leach v. Gunnarson

It appears to me that the rule stated in Ford v. White has long been the law of Oregon. See Hornbeck v.…

Belanger v. Howard

"From the time of the conveyance in question the plaintiff had undisputed possession of the Lebanon property,…