Legal Opinion

Union Paving Co. v. City Council

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 27, 1961No. Civ. No. 19251PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDraper, J.

This mandamus proceeding seeks to compel a city council to assess or reassess charges against city lots for payment of street paving costs. The trial court denied peremptory writ. Petitioner appeals.

By resolution of May 1, 1946, respondent city council au*441thorized the city engineer to enter into a contract with petitioner to perform street work in a designated area. The work was to be performed under the Improvement Act of 1911 and was to be charged against the lots benefited thereby (Sts. & Hys. Code, §§ 5000-6794). The contract was executed and petitioner substantially completed the work by…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Dillon v. Board of Pension CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Bogart v. George K. Porter Co.California Supreme Court · 1924
  3. County of San Luis Obispo v. GageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Barlow v. City Council of InglewoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Cowart v. Union Paving Co.California Supreme Court · 1932

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Phillis v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  2. County of Marin Association of Firefighters v. Marin County Employees Retirement Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API