Buckman v. Hatch
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco; Frank J. Murasky, Judge. Action by A. E. Buekman against Mary Hatch and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and William Nieol, one of the defendants, appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
GRAY, C.
This is an action to foreclose a street assessment. There was no demurrer to the complaint, but defendants answered, and on a trial plaintiff obtained judgment. Defendant Nicol appeals from the judgment, and the record on said appeal consists of the judgment-roll without a bill •of exceptions.
Two points are made by appellant, both directed to the sufficiency of the complaint.
1. It is claimed that it appears from the face of the complaint that the resolution of intention describing the work was insufficient to confer jurisdiction on the board of supervisors, in that it did not show of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Fletcher v. PratherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Larkin v. MullenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Williams v. BerginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Bituminous Lime Rock Paving & Improvement Co. v. FultonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Buckman v. FergusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895