# Cline v. Lewis

> California Supreme Court · June 6, 1917 · 175 Cal. 315

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3300865

## Case

- **Full name:** JOHN C. CLINE, Respondent, v. WALTER A. LEWIS, as Auditor of the County of Los Angeles, Appellant
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 6, 1917
- **Citations:** 175 Cal. 315; 165 P. 915; 1917 Cal. LEXIS 675
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Angellotti
- **Judges:** Angellotti, Sloss
- **Cited by:** 16 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3300865

## Opinion text

ANGELLOTTI, C. J., Concurring.—I concur.
Were the question a new one in this state, I would feel very doubtful as to the correctness of the conclusion as to the proper construction of the charter provision involved. It seems to me, however, that the construction that must be given to section 52 of the Los Angeles County Charter, so far as pertinent to the case at bar, is determined by the decision of this court in
Harrison v. Colgan,
148 Cal. 69 , [ 82 Pac. 674 ], I do not think that what was said as to
when
the salaries there involved were increased can be held to be
obiter dictum.
That decision was rendered in the year 1908. The Los Angeles County Charter was framed and submitted to and approved by the electors of the county in the year 1912. In all material respects section 52 thereof is similar to the provision of the Constitution considered in
Harrison
v.
Colgan, supra,
and I do not think we would be warranted in holding otherwise than that it was adopted in the light of that decision and with the meaning given thereby to similar language.
Rehearing denied.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3300865. Public record. Not legal advice.