Takata v. Riley

California Supreme Court

Takata v. Riley

214 Cal. 93

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 8, 1931

DocketS. F. No. 14424

StatusPublished

This text of 214 Cal. 93 (Takata v. Riley) 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

Takata v. Riley, 214 Cal. 93 (Cal. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

At the close of oral argument the chief justice announced the decision of the court as follows:

The question involved is not new. We have examined it a great many times. On the authority of Estate of Wellings, 192 Cal. 506, 519 [221 Pac. 628], Heron v. Riley, 209 Cal. 507 [289 Pac. 160], Frank v. Maguire, 201 Cal. 414 [257 Pac. 515], Buelke v. Levenstadt, 190 Cal. 684 [214 Pac. 42], and cases referred to therein, we are of the view that the title of this act is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the Constitution. The writ will issue.

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

THE COURT.

At the close of oral argument the chief justice announced the decision of the court as follows:

The question involved is not new. We have examined it a great many times. On the authority of Estate of Wellings, 192 Cal. 506, 519 [221 Pac. 628], Heron v. Riley, 209 Cal. 507 [289 Pac. 160], Frank v. Maguire, 201 Cal. 414 [257 Pac. 515], Buelke v. Levenstadt, 190 Cal. 684 [214 Pac. 42], and cases referred to therein, we are of the view that the title of this act is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the Constitution. The writ will issue.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 Cal. 93, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/takata-v-riley-cal-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack