Legal Opinion
Conlin v. Board of Supervisors
California Supreme Court
Decided July 21, 1893No. 15093PublishedCited by 55 opinions
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City aud County of Sau Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The legislature of this state at its session in 1891 passed the following act (Stats. 1891, p. 513): —
“The board of supervisors of the city and county of San Francisco are hereby authorized and directed to order paid to John J. Conlin, or his assigns or legal representatives, the sum of $54,015.37, said amount being the principal, together with all *20the interest thereon, that remains due and unpaid to the said John J. Conlin, on contracts entered into with the said John J. Conliu by the superintendent of streets of the said city and county, for work done upon the public streets of said city…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Stevenson v. ColganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Coleman v. . People of the State of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Bourn v. HartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Creighton v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- McBean v. City of San BernardinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by55 opinions
- Forster Shipbuilding Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Jordan v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- City of Oakland v. GarrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Hawks v. BlandSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
- County of San Diego v. HammondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.