Rosasco v. County of Tuolumne
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County. G. W. Nicol, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This action was brought to recover from the defendant the sum of sixty-nine dollars, on account of taxes paid by plaintiff under protest for certain cattle. The appeal is from the judgment upon the judgment-roll alone. The facts as set forth in the findings are therefore not in dispute. The court found that the estate of Rosasco, of which plaintiff is the executrix, owned about two thousand acres of land in Tuolumne County and about five hundred and eighty-nine acres of land in Stanislaus County, and upon the first Monday in March, 1901, was the owner of about three hundred and six head of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Weyse v. CrawfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- City of Oakland v. WhippleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- People v. NilesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- People v. National Bank of D. O. Mills & Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
- Whitmore v. McGregorNevada Supreme Court · 1890
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State ex rel. City of Fargo v. WetzNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1918
- Brock & Co. v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- Sayles v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Zantop Air Transport, Inc. v. County of San BernardinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- George M. Brewster & Son, Inc. v. BOR. OF BOGOTANew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.