Legal Opinion

Himmelman v. Danos

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1868PublishedCited by 30 opinions

Appeal from the District Court, Twelfth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. Action to enforce a lien on a lot for macadamizing a street in San Francisco. The complaint was as follows: 1st. That on the 12th day of February, 1866, the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco, in open session, awarded the contract for macadamizing from Van Hess Avenue, Oak street to Fell street, to B. Kenney. 2d.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court, Twelfth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. Action to enforce a lien on a lot for macadamizing a street in San Francisco. The complaint was as follows: 1st. That on the 12th day of February, 1866, the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco, in open session, awarded the contract for macadamizing from Van Hess Avenue, Oak street to Fell street, to B. Kenney. 2d. That on the 27th.day of February, 1866, the Superintendent of Public Streets and Highways entered into a contract with said B. Kenney, to whom the contract was…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Sanderson, J.:

The complaint commences with an averment that the Board of Supervisors, on the 12th of February, 1866, awarded the contract under which the street work in question was done, to one Kenney, assignor of the plaintiff. Hone of the precedent steps which the statute prescribes are generally or specially alleged; or, in other words, the facts conferring jurisdiction upon the Board are not stated. The complaint is silent as to the notice of intention, and as to all steps which, following the course of the statute, precede the awarding of the contract. The several steps,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Barner v. LeedsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Dye v. DyeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Byrne v. HarveyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  2. County of San Luis Obispo v. HendricksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Perine v. ForbushCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Rhoda v. Alameda Cty.California Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Green v. Grimes-Stassforth Stationary Co.California Court of Appeal · 1940

25 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