Drescher v. Board of Supervisors

California Supreme Court

Drescher v. Board of Supervisors

215 P. 902, 191 Cal. 234, 1923 Cal. LEXIS 442

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedMay 31, 1923

DocketS. F. No. 10706.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 215 P. 902 (Drescher v. Board of Supervisors) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Drescher v. Board of Supervisors, 215 P. 902, 191 Cal. 234, 1923 Cal. LEXIS 442 (Cal. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an application for a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent Board of Supervisors to appoint a member of the Honcut-Yuba Irrigation District, upon the ground that there is a vacancy in the board of that district representing division one. *Page 235

The application shows that the position is now being occupied by one C.F. Cox, who is performing the duties of the office with the acquiescence of his associates and under claim of right.

[1] Under the circumstances a writ of mandamus should not be issued because, in effect, it would require us to try the title to the office. The writ should not be granted until it has been established by judicial process that there is a vacancy to be filled. (Kelly v. Edwards,69 Cal. 460 [11 P. 1].)

The petition is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

This is an application for a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent Board of Supervisors to appoint a member of the Honcut-Yuba Irrigation District, upon the ground that there is a vacancy in the board of that district representing division one. *Page 235

The application shows that the position is now being occupied by one C.F. Cox, who is performing the duties of the office with the acquiescence of his associates and under claim of right.

[1] Under the circumstances a writ of mandamus should not be issued because, in effect, it would require us to try the title to the office. The writ should not be granted until it has been established by judicial process that there is a vacancy to be filled. (Kelly v. Edwards,69 Cal. 460 [11 P. 1].)

The petition is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 P. 902, 191 Cal. 234, 1923 Cal. LEXIS 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drescher-v-board-of-supervisors-cal-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack