Lyons v. Roach
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
After argument in Bank, we are satisfied that the judgment should be affirmed.
The action is for the enforcement of a street assessment. Patrick Cunningham in bis individual capacity, and also Patrick Cunningham as a representative of the estate of May Cunningham, deceased, were made parties *29defendant. The complaint charges Cunningham as “administrator” of the estate, and the summons is directed to him as “ executor.” The affidavit of service of summons shows that he was served as administrator. A default was entered against him as “executor.” Afterward, Roach succeeded Cunningham as…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Alderson v. Bell & WifeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Ghiradelli v. GreeneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Parker v. AltschulCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Lick v. StockdaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
3Cited by11 opinions
- Sichler v. LookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Kahn v. MatthaiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Livesay v. DeibertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- City of Los Angeles v. GlassellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Western Lumber & Mill Co v. Merchants' Amusement Co.California Court of Appeal · 1910
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.