Legal Opinion

People v. Robin

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 29, 1943No. Civ. 13564PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BISHOP, J. pro tem.

A civil action to abate one or more of the public nuisances defined by sections 3479 and 3480, Civil Code, existing in a city, may be brought by the city attorney in the name of the People of the State of California. (Code Civ. Proc., § 731.) Sections 3479 and 3480 do not embrace all public nuisances known to the law; they read: Section 3479. “Anything which is injurious to health, or is indecent or offensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property, or unlawfully obstructs the free…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. LimCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Kreling v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Pezold v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher WorkmenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Willson v. EdwardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Sunset Amusement Co. v. Board of Police CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. MacHado v. MacHadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Machado v. MachadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Gelfand v. O'HAVERCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  5. People v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954

10 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