Home/California Court of Appeal/Wagner v. State Board of Equalization

Wagner v. State Board of Equalization

36 P.2d 441, 1 Cal. App. 2d 757, 1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1362
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedOctober 4, 1934
DocketCiv. No. 5220
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 36 P.2d 441 (Wagner v. State Board of Equalization) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wagner v. State Board of Equalization, 36 P.2d 441, 1 Cal. App. 2d 757, 1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1362 (Cal. Ct. App. 1934).

Opinion

THE COURT.

This cause is before us upon an application of. the above-named petitioner praying that a writ of mandamus be issued directed to the above-named respondent, requiring the respondent to issue an “on sale” wine and beer license to the petitioner. The premises described in the petition are located at 574 Pacific Avenue, otherwise known as “Spider Kelly’s” place.

The record shows that this is an application for a license to sell wine and beer at a place heretofore known as ‘ ‘ Spider Kelly’s” cafe, the only change being in the name.

The evidence taken before the respondent board upon the hearing of the application of the petitioner for an “on sale” wine and beer license is practically identical with the testimony introduced in the case of Parente v. State Board of Equalization, Civil No. 5219 (ante, p. 238 [36 Pac. (2d) 437]), this day decided, to which reference is hereby made.

For the reasons stated in the opinion in the case above mentioned, the application of the petitioner for a writ of mandate must be, and the same is hereby, denied.

An application by petitioner to have the cause heard in the Supreme Court, after judgment in the District Court of Appeal, was denied by the Supreme Court on November 28, 1934.

Langdon, J., voted for a hearing.

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

Related

Beail v. District of Columbia
82 A.2d 765 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1951)
People v. Babb
229 P.2d 843 (California Court of Appeal, 1951)
City of Portland v. Goodwin
210 P.2d 577 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1949)
In Re Clarke
140 P.2d 92 (California Court of Appeal, 1943)
Wilde v. Superior Court
127 P.2d 560 (California Court of Appeal, 1942)
In Re Coon
112 P.2d 767 (California Court of Appeal, 1941)
People v. Beifuss
67 P.2d 411 (Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California, 1937)
In Re Moffett
64 P.2d 1190 (California Court of Appeal, 1937)
In Re Hartman
51 P.2d 1104 (California Court of Appeal, 1935)
In Re Casas
48 P.2d 990 (California Court of Appeal, 1935)
In Re Salas
38 P.2d 806 (California Court of Appeal, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 P.2d 441, 1 Cal. App. 2d 757, 1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1362, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wagner-v-state-board-of-equalization-calctapp-1934.