Pillsbury v. Brown
Synopsis
Salaries and Pees oe District Attorneys.—Section four thousand three hundred and thirty of the Political Code, as amended by the Act of March 28th, 1872, was intended to regulate the salaries of District Attorneys, as contradistinguished from fees to which they were entitled under existing laws, and does not repeal prior statutes allowing fees in addition to salaries.
By the Court: We are of the opinion that section four thousand three hundred and thirty of the Political Code as amended by the Act of March 28th, 1872 (Stats. 1871-2, p. 653), was intended to regulate the salaries of District Attorneys as contradistinguished from fees, to which they were entitled under existing laws, and was not intended and did not have the effect to repeal prior statutes, allowing fees in addition to salaries.
Peremptory mandate as prayed for ordered in each case.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)