Legal Opinion

Byrne v. Luning Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1894No. 15,628PublishedCited by 2 opinions

APPEAL from Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco; James M. Troutt, Judge. Action by Thomas Byrne against the Luning Company to enforce a street assessment. From a judgment for plaintiff and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

VANCLIEF, C.

Action to enforce a street assessment upon a lot of land in the city of San Francisco for the sum *896of $181.45, in which judgment passed for plaintiff and defendant’s motion for new trial was denied. Defendant appeals from the judgment, and also from the order denying its motion for a new trial.

1. Counsel for appellant contends that the complaint does not state a cause of action, because the specifications for the work furnished by the city engineer and made part of the contract were not set out in haec verba in the complaint. The complaint, however, does not purport to state any…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Libbey v. ElsworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. California Improvement Co. v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Rauer v. LoweCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895

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

Powered by the Exa API