Legal Opinion

Yarnell v. City of Los Angeles

California Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 1891No. 13920PublishedCited by 19 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.

This is an action brought by a resident, and tax-payer, against the city of Los Angeles, M. D. Johnson, treasurer of said city, and the City Bank, a private corporation. The purpose of the action is to enjoin the said treasurer from depositing the public moneys of the city with said bank pursuant to a certain contract between the city and the bank. Defendants filed a general demurrer “that said complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.” An answer and supplemental answer were filed, together with some affidavits, and the case was submitted. Subsequently, the…

2Cited by19 opinions

  1. In Re PfahlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Simpson v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  3. City of Los Angeles v. TeedCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Banaz v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  5. San Diego County v. California Nat. BankU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1892

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API