Legal Opinion

Oakland Paving Co. v. Hilton

California Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 1886No. 11194PublishedCited by 112 opinions

Appeal from. a. judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County. The facts are stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Thornton.

1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.

This is an application by plaintiff, a corporation, to the Superior Court of the county of Alameda for a writ of mandate to the defendant, commanding him, as city marshal of the city of Oakland, to enter into and execute a certain contract for grading, curbing, and macadamizing to the official grade a portion of a street in the city of Oakland, and to fix the times for the commencement and completion of the work to be done under the said contract, which the said defendant had refused to sign and execute.

In obedience to an alternative writ, the defendant appeared, and by his answer showed…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Koehler & Lange v. HillSupreme Court of Iowa · 1883
  2. Sherman v. StoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  3. Collier v. FriersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1854
  4. State v. McBrideSupreme Court of Missouri · 1836
  5. Weill v. KenfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880

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

3Cited by112 opinions

  1. People v. Western Air Lines, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Kadderly v. PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Katzberg v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Ellingham v. DyeIndiana Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Swift & Co. v. City of Newport NewsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1906

107 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