Miller & Lux, Inc. v. Sacramento & San Joaquin Drainage Dist.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWilbur, J.
This proceeding was instituted to contest the validity of general assessment No. 1 made by the defendant. The judgment affirmed the assessment. The defendant was created by the legislature in 1913 (Stats. 1913, p. 252). The district contains 1,735,533 acres of land,' of which three hundred and sixty-seven thousand are situated in the valley of the San Joaquin Biver and the balance in the valley of the Sacramento Biver. By the assessment attacked herein five cents per acre was levied upon the land in the San Joaquin "Valley and fifteen cents per acre upon the land in the Sacramento Valley. The…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Norwood v. BakerSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Myles Salt Co. v. Board of Comm'rs of Iberia and St. Mary Drainage Dist.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Gray v. Reclamation District No. 1500California Supreme Court · 1917
- People Ex Rel. Chapman v. Sacramento Drainage Dist.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Los Angeles County Flood Control District v. HamiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Tarpey v. McClureCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Orosi Public Utility District v. McCuaigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Miller & Lux, Inc. v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Schomer v. ScottSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1937
- In Re Sutter-Butte By-Pass Assessment No. 6California Supreme Court · 1923
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.