Legal Opinion

Durant v. City of Beverly Hills

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 17, 1940No. Civ. 11337PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNourse, P. J.

Plaintiff sued for declaratory relief in relation to rates charged him by defendant for water served for domestic purposes. Plaintiff had judgment declaring that he was ‘ ‘ entitled to service of water from the defendant at the same rates as fixed for consumers inside the corporate limits of the city of Beverly Hills”. On its appeal from this judgment the city’s main ground of attack is that the judgment is against law and unsupported by any evidence entitling plaintiff to relief.

The plaintiff and others located in unincorporated territory near the city of Beverly Hills had been served with…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. City of Knoxville v. Knoxville Water Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
  2. City of S. Pasadena v. Pasadena Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
  3. City of Pasadena v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Fellows v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Kiefer v. City of Idaho FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1930

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Jager v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Polk v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Metropolitan Water Dist. v. MarquardtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Mitchell v. City of WichitaSupreme Court of Kansas · 2000
  5. City & County of San Francisco v. Western Air Lines, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1962

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API