Haughawout v. Hubbard
California Supreme Court
The action was brought to foreclose an assessment for the construction of a public sewer in the city of Los Angeles, which, by the terms of the ordinance, was required to “be constructed in accordance with the plans and profiles on file in the office of the city engineer, and specifications on file in the office of the city clerk of the city of Los Angeles, said specifications being designated C and D.” Further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
The suit was brought for the foreclosure of an assessment lien on a lot of the defendants in the city of Los Angeles for sewer work. The proceedings for the assessment are set out in detail in the findings. The judgment was for the defendants and the plaintiff appeals.
The ordinance for the work requires it to be done “in accordance with the plans and specifications on file in the clerk’s office of the city of Los Angeles, said specifications being designated C and D.” The ordinance of intention contains a similar provision. It is claimed by the respondent in effect that these…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bolton v. GilleranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Chase v. City Treasurer of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Warren v. ChandosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Stansbury v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by14 opinions
- Chase v. TroutCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Banaz v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Kaufman v. TomichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Haughawout v. RaymondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Town of Mill Valley v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.