Legal Opinion
Cowart v. Union Paving Co.
California Supreme Court
Decided September 23, 1932No. Docket No. L.A. 11053PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TYLER, J., pro tem.
This action was brought to enjoin defendants from proceeding to collect assessments levied under proceedings instituted under the Improvement Act of 1911, and from issuing any bonds under the Improvement Bond Act of 1915.
The work was done under a district plan and was fully and properly completed and the expense thereof was placed against an assessment district. The city of Bakersfield took its initial step to make the improvements in August, 1924, by passing a resolution of intention, number 499, for the paving of M Street for the full length of four blocks. A protest was…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Spencer v. MerchantSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- City of Seattle v. KelleherSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Richman v. Supervisors Muscatine CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
- Bellingham Bay & British Columbia RailRoad v. New WhatcomSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Voigt v. Detroit CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1902
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- American Co. v. City of LakeportCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- County of Riverside v. WhitlockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Coast Elevator Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- Harrison v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- County of Los Angeles v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.