Drescher v. Board of Supervisors

215 P. 902, 191 Cal. 234, 1923 Cal. LEXIS 442
California Supreme Court·Decided May 31, 1923·No. S. F. No. 10706.·Published·Cited by 3 cases

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

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

215 P. 902 (Drescher v. Board of Supervisors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Klose v. Superior Court
217 P.2d 97 (California Court of Appeal, 1950)
Jaramillo v. State Ex Rel. Board of County Com'rs
250 P. 729 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1926)
Meeker v. Reed
232 P. 760 (California Court of Appeal, 1924)