Arizona Supreme Court, 1938

In re City of Phoenix

Arizona Supreme Court · Decided May 9, 1938 · PER CURIAM.

79 P.2d 360; 52 Ariz. 97; 1938 Ariz. LEXIS 140 (Pacific Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. I.A. Jennings, City Attorney, Mr. Hess Seaman and Mr. Richard F. Harless, his Assistants; Messrs. Snell, Strouss Salmon, Mr. J. Early Craig, Messrs. Kibbey, Bennett, Gust, Smith Rosenfeld, Mr. T.G. McKesson, Mr. Frank J. Duffy, Mr. T.A. Carson, Mr. Emmett R. Feighner and Mr. Evan S. Stallcup, for Appellant. Messrs. Palmer Cornelius and Messrs. Cunningham Carson, for Appellees. Mr. E.C. Locklear, City Attorney, Prescott; Mr. G.H. Drumm, City Attorney, Winslow; Mr. William H. Westover, City Attorney, Yuma; Mr. Stephen D. Monahan, City Attorney, Nogales; Mr. Cullen A. Little, City Attorney, Globe; Mr. George F. Senner, City Attorney, Miami; Mr. James A. Walsh, City Attorney, Mesa; Mr. Martin Gentry, City Attorney, Willcox; Mr. A. Van Wagenen, Jr., City Attorney, Casa Grande; Mr. Edward R. Byers, Town Attorney, Williams; Mr. I.F. Wolpe, Jr., Town Attorney, Wickenburg; Mr. James T. Gentry, City Attorney, Bisbee; Mr. Orinn C. Compton, City Attorney, Flagstaff; Mr. B.G. Thompson, City Attorney, Tucson, and Mr. Arthur Henderson, of Counsel, for City of Tucson, Amici Curiae.

Opinion of the Court

The question for review in this case is the same as that in case No. 3945, Udall v. Severn, ante, p. 65, 79 P.2d 347, and is controlled by the decision just handed down in that case. Under the stipulation of counsel it was submitted upon the same briefs and statement of facts.

The same order will be made as in case No. 3945.

McALISTER, C.J., and ROSS and LOCKWOOD, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.