1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.App.3d
  4. 22 Cal.App.3d
  5. 22 Cal.App.3d 863 (1972)
 

COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE v. WHITLOCK

Docket No. 10988.

22 Cal.App.3d 863 (1972)

99 Cal. Rptr. 710

COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MAMIE L. WHITLOCK et al., Defendants and Appellants; GROSS AND COMPANY, INC., Defendant and Respondent.

Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Two.

January 13, 1972.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

COUNSEL

Macomber & Eley and William B. Eley for Defendants and Appellants.

Ganahl & Ganahl and John T. Ganahl for Plaintiff and Respondent.

F. Mackenzie Brown for Defendant and Respondent.

OPINION

TAMURA, J.

The primary issue posed by this appeal is whether the majority protest schemes provided by the Municipal Improvement Act of 19131 and the Special Assessment Investigation, Limitation and Majority Protest Act of 19312 are subject to the "one-person, one-vote" equal protection standard governing distribution of the elective franchise.

The following...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases