Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

18 Cal. 408

Garrison v. Tillinghast

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1861

California Supreme Court · decided 1861-07-01

There is no need of any statement of facts, further than that the averments of the complaint are similar to those in the preceding… Held: for the purposes of this act, to be a.-passenger broker, and shall be previously licensed 'as such, -in 'the manner and mode as hereinafter provided.” By subsequent sections the license is,, fixed at one per cent, on the gross monthly sales' from a broker’s business, and a penalty is affixed for neglecting to take out the license.

Cited in Bouvier (1914)’s definition of “Recovery”

Decided 1861-07-01

Field, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court

¶1Cope, J. concurring.

¶2This is an action to recover of .the defendant, who was formerly Treasurer of the city and county of San Francisco, certain moneys paid to him by the plaintiffs for a license -as passenger brokers, under the Act of March 25th, 1857. The plaintiffs base their claim upon the alleged unconstitutionality of the act in question, and the alleged compulsory character of the payments made by them. It is unnecessary to consider the constitutionality of the act, for, in our judgment, the complaint does not show that the payments were the result of any compulsion or coercion on the part of the defendant. The case is covered by the decision recently rendered in a case bearing the same title, and also in the case of Brumagim v. Tillinghast.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

/18/cal/408 · .json · Public domain