Legal Opinion

Miller v. City & County of San Francisco

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 19, 1960No. Civ. 19077PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDuniwat, J.

Appeal by plaintiff from an adverse judgment, entered following an order sustaining a general demurrer to his first amended complaint. He also appeals from the order, which is not appealable. The sole question is whether the complaint states a cause of action. We hold that it does not.

There are three causes of action alleged. The first is predicated upon trespass. It is alleged that on January 2, 1959, plaintiff owned a parcel of real property in Ban Francisco, and that the defendants who are the city and county of San Francisco, its director of public works, and its chief engineer and three…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Faulkner v. California Toll Bridge AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Hardy v. VialCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  3. White v. TowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Southern California Gas Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Wilson v. SharpCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Manti v. GunariCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  2. Ngim v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  3. Rosenbaum v. RosenbaumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  4. Shusett, Inc. v. Home Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  5. Connelly v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

1 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