McNeil v. City of South Pasadena
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. John E. Carson, N. W. Bell, and W. S. Wright, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
By this action plaintiffs sought and obtained an injunction restraining the defendant from improving Huntington drive, a public street of the defendant, the city of South Pasadena. The public highway sought .to be improved consists of two parallel driveways separated by a strip of land eighty feet in width owned by the defendant, Pacific Electric Railway Company as a private right of way for its four-track railway system which leads from the city of Los Angeles to the city of South Pasadena. All of this eighty-foot strip, saving where it crosses intersecting highways of the city of South…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Knoxville Water Co. v. KnoxvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Thompson v. Board of TrusteesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Smith v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Southern California Railway Co. v. WorkmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- San Francisco Gas Light Co. v. DunnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by23 opinions
- City and County of San Francisco v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Alexander v. MitchellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Gibson Properties Co. v. City of OaklandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Alameda County Land Use Assn. v. City of HaywardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Rutledge v. City of EurekaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.