Alameda Macadamizing Co. v. Williams
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
This action was brought to foreclose a lien on block 52, East Fourteenth Street, Oakland, based upon a street assessment made by the municipal authorities of the city of Oakland.
Plaintiff had judgment, from which, and from an order denying a new trial, defendant Williams appeals.
The first point made by appellant is, that the council exceeded its jurisdiction in attempting to let the work of macadamizing several separate and distinct portions of Fourteenth Street in one contract.
The jurisdiction of the municipal corporation to improve the street is contained in the statutes of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Moody v. PalmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Severy v. Central Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Maynard v. WeeksSupreme Court of Vermont · 1869
- Low v. McCallanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by11 opinions
- Berton v. All Persons, Etc.California Supreme Court · 1917
- City of Redlands v. NickersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Treasure Island Catering Co., Inc. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- McADAM ET UX v. SMITHOregon Supreme Court · 1960
- Richardson v. City of EurekaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.