Legal Opinion

Watkinson v. Vaughn

California Supreme Court

Decided January 8, 1920No. S. F. No. 8524PublishedCited by 27 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of-the court. William T. Kearney and Edward C. Harrison for Appellant.

1Opinion of the Court

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendants in an action brought by the plaintiff as the owner of some twenty lots in the city of Richmond, to quiet her title to, and to enjoin the defendants from proceeding to the sale of, such lots to satisfy a lien thereon on account of the nonpayment of certain installments due on a series of street improvement bonds issued by the city of Richmond to pay for the improvement of Cutting Boulevard, in that city. The work was done and the bonds issued pursuant to proceedings under "the improvement Act of 1911" (Stats. 1911, p. 730). Section 4…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Chase v. TroutCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Baird v. MonroeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Mulligan v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Wilcox v. EngebretsenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Imperial Land Co. v. Imperial Irr. Dist.California Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Golden Gate Bridge & Highway District v. FeltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Miller & Lux, Inc. v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Miller & Lux Inc. v. SecaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  4. City of Sausalito v. County of MarinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  5. In Re East Bay Etc. Water Bonds of 1925California Supreme Court · 1925

22 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