Legal Opinion

McDonald v. Patterson

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1880No. 6,989PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Application for a writ of mandamus.

1Opinion of the Court

Department No. 2, Thornton, P. J.:

This is an application for a writ of mandate, commanding the defendant, who is Superintendent of Streets, Highways and *246Squares for the City and County of San Francisco, to execute, • in his official character, a contract for the construction of a brick sewer in the northerly and southerly half of the crossing of Yan Ness Avenue and Pine Street, to connect in the center of said crossing with the sewer at present therein, so as to form a full crossing.

It appears from the facts stated in the petition of McDonald, (which are not denied) that on the 29th of…

2Cited by17 opinions

  1. Oakland Paving Co. v. HiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Thomason v. AshworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Ex Parte McNaughtSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
  4. In re MaguireCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Wren v. DixonNevada Supreme Court · 1916

12 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