Legal Opinion
Horton v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
Decided January 17, 1898No. L. A. No. 433PublishedCited by 5 opinions
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Lucien Shaw, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, C.
Plaintiff brought this action to restrain defendants from taking any further steps under a notice of sale of a certain telephone franchise. The city council of Los Angeles had invited proposals for the sale of a telephone franchise under the act of March 33,1893. (Stats. 1893,p. 388.) Under the notice,the tenders or proposals were to be opened on May 10, 1897. On that day plaintiff filed his complaint and obtained a temporary injunction as prayed for. An act of the legislature, was passed March 13, 1897 (Stats. 1897, p. 135), repealing all acts inconsistent with it, and this act…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Foster v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
3Cited by5 opinions
- Williams v. ReedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Davies v. RamsdellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Diederichsen v. SutchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Wright v. Bd. of Pub . Works of L.A.California Supreme Court · 1912
- North Confidence Mining & Development Co. v. FitchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922