From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cutten v. McCarthy

Supreme Court of California,In Bank
Sep 8, 1911
160 Cal. 809 (Cal. 1911)

Opinion

S.F. No. 5511, S.F. No. 5512, S.F. No. 5513.

September 8, 1911.

APPEALS from judgments of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. George A Sturtevant, Judge.

The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion in Barendt v. McCarthy, ante, p. 680.

Barclay Henley, and Arthur H. Barendt, in pro. per., for Appellant,

Frank J. Murphy, for Respondent, John S. Martin.

Cleveland L. Dam, George Appell, and A.L. O'Grady, for Respondents, P.H. McCarthy and Arthur M. Sharp.

Percy V. Long, City Attorney, and F.J. English, Assistant City Attorney, Amici Curiæ, on petition for rehearing.


These cases being exactly similar in all particulars to Barendt v. McCarthy, S.F. No. 5507, ante, p. 680, in which the opinion was filed this day, the judgment of the lower court in each of them is, upon authority of that case, affirmed.


I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in Barendt v. McCarthy, this day filed.

Beatty, C.J., and Angellotti, J., concurred.

Rehearing in each denied.


Summaries of

Cutten v. McCarthy

Supreme Court of California,In Bank
Sep 8, 1911
160 Cal. 809 (Cal. 1911)
Case details for

Cutten v. McCarthy

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH E. CUTTEN, Appellant, v. P.H. McCARTHY, Mayor, etc. et al.…

Court:Supreme Court of California,In Bank

Date published: Sep 8, 1911

Citations

160 Cal. 809 (Cal. 1911)
118 P. 233

Citing Cases

Yates v. Summers

We submit that we have examined the cases below listed and find that each case is an approval of the…