Home/California Supreme Court/Hackel v. Municipal Court of the City of Los Angeles

Hackel v. Municipal Court of the City of Los Angeles

285 P. 704, 209 Cal. 780, 1930 Cal. LEXIS 555
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 24, 1930
DocketDocket No. L.A. 11632.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 285 P. 704 (Hackel v. Municipal Court of the City of Los Angeles) 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
Hackel v. Municipal Court of the City of Los Angeles, 285 P. 704, 209 Cal. 780, 1930 Cal. LEXIS 555 (Cal. 1930).

Opinion

THE COURT.

[1] This is a proceeding in mandate similar in all essential particulars to the preceding cases of Harris v. Municipal Courtet al. (L.A. No. 11787), ante, p. 55 [285 P. 699], and Gutterman v. Municipal Court et al. (L.A. No. 11605), ante, p. 65 [295 P. 703], this day *Page 781 decided. The complaint against the petitioner for usury, a misdemeanor, was filed in the respondent court on September 23, 1927, and the warrant was served on April 18, 1929, and nothing was done by the prosecution in the meantime to bring the case on for trial. Proceedings similar to those in the other cases were taken in the respondent court to bring about a dismissal of the action with like result. On the authority of those cases the peremptory writ of mandamus is ordered issued as prayed.

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

Related

People v. Rogers
120 Cal. App. Supp. 3d 7 (Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
285 P. 704, 209 Cal. 780, 1930 Cal. LEXIS 555, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hackel-v-municipal-court-of-the-city-of-los-angeles-cal-1930.