Legal Opinion
Melendez v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
Decided May 24, 1937No. L. A. 16125PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtTpiompson, J.
We granted a hearing in this case after decision by the District Court of Appeal of the Second District, Division One, in order that we might give further consideration to the question of whether the rule announced in Beeson v. City of Los Angeles, 115 Cal. App. 122 [300 Pac. 993], or the doctrine of Sanchez v. East Contra Costa Irr. Co., 205 Cal. 515 [271 Pac. 1060], should govern the determination thereof. The statement of facts is taken from the opinion by Mr. Justice Roth, sitting pro tempore.
“This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon an order sustaining a demurrer without leave to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Peters v. BowmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Spreckels v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Beeson v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Cahill v. E. B. & A. L. Stone & Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
- Faylor v. Great Eastern Quicksilver Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Reynolds v. WillsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- McCleod v. Tri-State Milling Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1946
- King v. LennenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- Demmer v. City of EurekaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Massie v. CopelandTexas Supreme Court · 1950
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.