¶1The law of January 26th, 1852, did not take effect until the 27th, the date on which it received the approval *81of the Governor; and does not, in its operation, affect any money in the hands of the Treasurer before the 27th. Such money must be paid according to the provisions of law. So much of the judgment of the Court below as gives costs against the Treasurer, must be reversed. The judgment for a peremptory mandamus is affirmed, with costs.
2 Cal. 80
McDougal v. Roman
Decided January 15, 1852
California Supreme Court · decided 1852-01-15
McDougal filed his petition, stating himself to be the holder and owner of a State warrant, dated January 30th, 1852, drawn by the Comptroller on the State Treasury, for the payment of §1220 to the plaintiff, out of the general fund, not otherwise appropriated by law; and averring that on the said 30th of January, the plaintiff presented the warrant to Roman, then and still State Treasurer, who had in his hands sufficient moneys of the general fund otherwise unappropriated…
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1882
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1852-01-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →