Board of Law Library Trustees v. Board of Supervisors
Before: Garoutte
Synopsis
Law Libraeies — Constitutionality op Statute — Discretionary Power op Supervisors. — The legislature had the power to enact the act approved March 81, 1891, to establish law libraries, and to provide therein that counties might come within or remain without the provision of the act, as the boards of supervisors of the respective counties might determine.
Id__County Ordinance Adopting Statute—Repeal Ineffective.—When e comity has once by ordinance come within the provisions of the act to establish law libraries, it is there for all purposes, and cannot thereafter evade the force and effect of the statute by a repeal of the ordinance adopting its provisions.
Id.—Mandamus—Library Rooms.—When the board of supervisors of a county which has once adopted the provisions of the act of March 81,1891, fails to provide a suitable or sufficient library room, the board of law library trustees of the county may by writ of mandate compel the board of supervisors to provide such room.
Garoutte, J. This is an application for a writ of mandate. The matter is before us upon a demurrer to the petition, aud the merits of the proceeding may be fully determined by a consideration of the facts relied upon by petitioner for the issuance of the writ. The writ is asked to issue against the board of supervisors of Orange County, requiring them to provide a library room for the use of the law library created under the statutes of this state. (See Stats. 1891, p. 430.)
The petition alleges the establishment of the library as pro- ■ vided by the statute; that there is no suitable room for the use of said library; that the board of supervisors furnished some shelving, enclosed by doors, upon which the books were placed in a large room, one hundred feet by twenty-five feet, which was used by the principal county officers of the county for the performance of their official duties, and also for the meetings of the board of supervisors; that said room has no partitions other than desks aud railings; that said shelves are [572]located on one side of said room and about midway from front to rear thereof, and between the space occupied by the county clerk and county auditor; that access to the books is obstructed and rendered greatly inconvenient by furniture and other articles occupying said room and that the books cannot be consulted or used with reasonable convenience, or in any proper or satisfactory manner. The petition further states, “ That on the fifth day of May, 1891, said board of supervisors duly passed an ordinance, No.' 14, and which is in the words and figures following: —
“The board of supervisors of the county of Orange do ordain as follows: —
“Sec. 1. The provisions of the act. entitled ‘ An act to establish law libraries’ of the laws of 1891 of the state of California, and approved March 31, 1891, are hereby made applicable to the county of Orange.” It is further alleged that on the sixteenth day of May, 1893, the said board of supervisors undertook to repeal and annul said ordinance No. 14, by an ordinance, No. 23, which is in the words and figures following: —
“ The board of supervisors of the county of Orange do ordain as follows:—
“Sec. 1. Ordinance No. 14 of the county of Orange, entitled i An ordinance making applicable to the county of Orange the act of the legislature of the state, entitled “An act to establish law libraries,” approved March 31, 1891, is hereby repealed.’”
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)