Federal Construction Co. v. Curd
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandate originally made to the Supreme Court to compel certification of list of unpaid street assessments. Denied. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Morrison, Dunne & Brobeck, Maurice E. Power, and Raymond Benjamin, for Petitioner. Guy Knupp, Geo. G. Murry, C. L. Russell, C. L. Russell, Jr., and Thomas, Beedy & Lanagan, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the Court
RICHARDS, J., pro tem.
This is an application for a writ of mandate by which the petitioner seeks to compel J. E. Curd, as superintendent of streets of the city of Porterville, California, to certify to W. L. Graham, as treasurer of said city, a list of unpaid assessments upon certain street improvement work alleged to have been done therein by the petitioner, and to direct the said treasurer to issue street improvement bonds thereon, representing the amount of said unpaid assessments. The facts giving rise to this proceeding are practically undisputed and may be stated as follows:
In the month…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cady v. PurserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Himmelman v. DanosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Federal Construction Co. v. CurdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Bentley v. HurlburtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- S. M. Bernard Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lewis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Thibodo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
- Beatty v. HughesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Butler v. ScholefieldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Todd v. City of VisaliaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.