County of Los Angeles v. Ballerino
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
The points urged by appellant upon the re-argument of this case have been fully considered by us, and we think the judgment and order appealed from should be affirmed for the reasons given by us in the former opinion, filed herein on March 9, 1893, and that opinion will stand as the opinion of the court.
Judgment and order affirmed.
The following is the opinion above referred to, rendered in Department Two, on the 9th of March, 1893: —
De Haven, J.
This is an action by the county of Los Angeles to recover from the defendant Ballerino taxes levied for county purposes in the year 1888,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Taylor v. SecorSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- National Bank v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Merrill v. HumphreyMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
- Lefferts v. Board of SupervisorsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1867
- City & County of San Francisco v. LuningCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
- Los Angeles Gas & Electric Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Universal Consolidated Oil Co. v. ByramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Simms v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Cohn v. City & Town of HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.