City of Petaluma v. Hickey
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.
The plaintiff commenced an action against the defendant to recover a judgment for money. The defendant appeared and answered. The trial was had before the lower court, sitting without a jury. That court made findings of fact in favor of the defendant, and from a judgment entered thereon the plaintiff has appealed and has brought up a bill of exceptions.
The controversy is an outgrowth of a street improvement proceeding. J. E. Cavanagb et ah, owned two tracts in the City of Petaluma. The City commenced a proceeding for the opening, extending, and widening of Douglas Street. Thereafter such…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- People of the State of N.Y. v. . IngersollNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Board of Supervisors v. . EllisNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Douglass v. ToddCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Lamar Township v. City of LamarSupreme Court of Missouri · 1914
- People of the State of N.Y. v. . FieldsNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Moss v. MossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Aebli v. Board of EducationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Schaefer v. BerinsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Pack v. VartanianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Dunne v. City of Fall RiverMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1952
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.