Long Beach City High School District v. Stewart
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.
In this proceeding to condemn land for a new junior high school, defendants Irwin Stewart, William Henry Stewart and M. Pearl Coyle have appealed. After a careful review of the entire record we have concluded that the trial court committed no reversible error, and that the judgment should therefore be affirmed. Irwin Stewart is the only defendant on whose behalf points have been presented in appellants’ brief and on oral argument. Therefore, for convenience, he will hereinafter be referred to as appellant.
The property condemned consists of five parcels, totaling 18.60 acres, on the outskirts…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Sacramento Etc. R.R. Co. v. HeilbronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Spring Valley Water Works v. DrinkhouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Cent. Pac. R.R. v. PearsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Lebrun v. RichardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Finkler v. PurcellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by91 opinions
- City of Austin v. CannizzoTexas Supreme Court · 1954
- People v. Ocean Shore Railroad, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1948
- Barnes v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- People v. La MacChiaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- People Ex Rel. Dept. of Public Works v. DonovanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.