Constitutional Law · MBE-tested
HENRY LEVY COMPANY, Respondent, v. G. H. HECKE, as Director of Agriculture, etc., Appellant
68 Cal. App. 800·District Court of Appeal of the State of California·1924·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. 4646.
First Appellate District, Division One.
June 30, 1924.]
HENRY LEVY COMPANY, Respondent, v. G. H. HECKE, as Director of Agriculture, etc., Appellant.
Constitutional Law-^Cattle Protection—Inspection—Notice— Due Process.—Judgment affirmed upon authority of H. Moffat Co. v. Sedee, ante, p. 35.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Frank J. Murasky, Judge.
Affirmed.
This case presents the same questions as R. Moffat Co. v. Hecke, ante, p. 35.
U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, Leon E. French, Deputy Attorney-General, Edward E. Leighton and George G. Clough for Appellant.
W. E. Cashman and R. M. Soto for Respondent.
[MAJORITY — TYLER, P. J.]
TYLER, P. J.
In this case the plaintiff, a foreign corporation, brought an action to enjoin defendant from inspecting cattle shipped by it from other states into the state of California for slaughtering purposes. It is a companion case to R. Moffat Co. v. Hecke, ante, p. 35 [228 Pac. 546], and presents the same questions. Upon the .authority of that case the judgment herein is affirmed.
Knight, J., and St. Sure, J., concurred.