City & County of San Francisco v. County of San Mateo
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCarter, J.
The controversy presented by this appeal involves the extent to which the improvements on the land of a municipality lying outside its corporate limits are subject to taxation by the county in which such improvements are situated. There is no substantial dispute as to the facts. Prior to March 3, 1930, the Spring Valley Water Company, a public utility, owned two reservoirs, Crystal Springs and San Andreas, and the flume hereinafter mentioned, which facilities were used for impounding and distributing water for sale to the inhabitants of the City and County of San Francisco. Connecting these…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cypress Lawn Cemetery Ass'n v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Platt v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- L. W. Blinn Lumber Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- City of Pasadena v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- City & County of San Francisco v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Cal. Drive-In Restaurant Assn. v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Cedars of Lebanon Hospital v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Steen v. Board of Civil Service CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- Gage v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Stillwell v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.