Scott v. Boyle — 25 Cal. App. 806

Majority

p. 806

[Civ. No. 1457.

First Appellate District.

September 22, 1914.]

M. P. SCOTT, Petitioner and Respondent, v. THOMAS F. BOYLE, as Auditor of the City and County of San Francisco, State of California, Appellant.

Headnote

Public Officer—Vacancy in Office—Prevention of Performance of Duties by Injunction.—Judgment affirmed on the authority of McEvers v. Boyle, ante, p. 476.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order refusing a new trial. J. M. Seawell, Judge.

The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion in McEvers v. Boyle, ante, p. 476.

Percy V. Long, City Attorney, and Harry G. McKannay, Assistant City Attorney, for Appellant.

Pemberton & Pemberton, for Respondent.

The parties in the above-entitled cause having stipulated that the appeals from the judgment and order rendered in said cause in favor of the respondent, M. P. Scott, presents questions identical with those presented in the case of No. 1431, McEvers v. Boyle, ante, p. 476, [ 144 Pac. 308 ], decided by this court on September 21, 1914; that the facts in both cases are in all respects the same; and that all briefs and arguments filed and made on the appeal from the judgment in favor of the petitioner and respondent, J. W. McEvers (being case No. 1431), may be considered as made and filed in the appeal from the judgment and order in favor of said respondent M. P. Scott,

Now, therefore, it is hereby ordered upon the authority of the case of McEvers v. Boyle (Civ. No. 1431), and for the reasons stated in the opinion filed therein, that the order and judgment appealed from in the above-entitled cause be, and the same are hereby affirmed.