Legal Opinion
City of Oakland v. California Construction Co.
California Supreme Court
Decided June 27, 1940No. S. F. 14699, 14700PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
The question for decision concerns the right of the City of Oakland to recover the proceeds of a street improvement contract. In each of the two cases which have been consolidated upon appeal, a demurrer was sustained without leave to amend, and the appeals are from the judgments which followed those orders.
In 1928, the respondent, a paving contractor, was awarded two contracts for street work to be done under the provisions of the Improvement Act of 1911. (Stats. 1911, p. 730.) One complaint is based upon the contract for Greenly Drive, the other upon that for Columbian Drive, but except for…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- McMullen v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Berka v. WoodwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Smith v. BachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Stockton Plumbing & Supply Co. v. WheelerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- Moody v. ShuffletonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Jered Contracting Corp. v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Thomson v. CallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Schaefer v. BerinsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Millbrae Assn. for Residential Survival v. City of MillbraeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Severance v. Knight-Counihan Co.California Supreme Court · 1947
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.