Legal Opinion

Ferguson v. Gardner

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 29, 1927No. Docket No. 6018PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, J., pro tem.

P laintiff, as a taxpayer, commenced an action against defendants, seeking certain relief to be herein more fully detailed. Defendants filed a general demurrer to the complaint, which demurrer was sustained by the court below and plaintiff was allowed ten days to amend. Plaintiff declined to amend, and, the time elapsing, a judgment was entered that plaintiff take nothing and that the relief sought be denied.

The question before us for review is on the sufficiency of the complaint as against a general demurrer.

The complaint alleges: That the plaintiff is a ' citizen,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Potter v. ChambersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Moss v. ShearCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
  3. Merced County v. Helm & NolanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  4. County of Glenn v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Connelly v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Waldorf v. City of AlhambraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  2. Otis v. Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Fort v. Board of Medical Quality AssuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
  4. Totten v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  5. Fort v. Board of Medical Quality AssuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982

2 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