History
  • No items yet
midpage
Walser v. Austin
104 Cal. 128
Cal.
1894
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

De Haven, J.

It was held in the case of Welsh v. Bramlet, 98 Cal. 219, that subdivision 21 of section 170 *130of the- County Government' Act, approved March 31, 1891 (Stats. 1891, p. 295), contains local and special legislation, and is in conflict with section 5 of article XI of the constitution of the state, which directs that the legislature by general and uniform laws shall provide for the election or appointment in the several counties of such county, township, and municipal officers “as public convenience may require, and shall prescribe their duties and fix their terms of office.” We can add nothing to the reasoning by which that conclusion was reached, and upon the authority of that case the judgment and order herein must be affirmed.

Judgment and order affirmed.

Fitzgeuald, J., concurred.





Concurrence Opinion

McFarland, J.

I concur in the judgment solely upon the authority of Welsh v. Bramlet, 98 Cal. 219, and Dougherty v. Austin, 94 Cal. 601, in which cases I could not concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Walser v. Austin
Court Name: California Supreme Court
Date Published: Sep 17, 1894
Citation: 104 Cal. 128
Docket Number: No. 18249
Court Abbreviation: Cal.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.