General
D. P. NARVAEZ, Respondent, v. BOARD OF POLICE AND FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF SAN JOSE et al., Appellants
27 Cal. App. 791·District Court of Appeal of the State of California·1915·CA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
[Civ. No. 1314.
Third Appellate District.
March 20, 1915.]
D. P. NARVAEZ, Respondent, v. BOARD OF POLICE AND FIRE COMMISSIONERS OF SAN JOSE et al., Appellants.
Mandamus—Proceeding for Salary and Reinstatement as Police Officer.—Judgment reversed on the authority of Eumbwrg v. Board of Bolioe and Fire -Commissioners of the City of San Jose, ante, p. 6.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County and from an order denying a new trial. John E. Richards, and William A. Beasley, Judges.
The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion in Hum-burg v. Board of Police mid Fire Commissioners of the City of San Jose, ante, p. 6.
John W. Sullivan, City Attorney, for Appellants.
J. C. Black, for Respondent.
[MAJORITY — BURNETT, J.]
BURNETT, J.
For the reason stated in the decision filed this day in Humburg v. Board of Police and Fire Commissioners of the City of San Jose et al., (Civ. No. 1313), ante, p. 6, [148 Pac. 802], the judgment is reversed.
Chipman, P. J., and Hart, J., concurred.
A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the district court of appeal on April 19, 1915, and a petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on May 17,1915.