Legal Opinion
Roberts v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
Decided September 29, 1936No. L. A. 14323PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.
Plaintiff, the owner of lots Nos. 13, 14 and 15, all in Madeline tract, city of Los Angeles, brought this action in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, praying for judgment for the cancellation of assessments levied in the sums of $29.69 on lot No. 13 and $29.80 on each of the other two lots for street lighting purposes. Said assessments were subsequently confirmed by the city council.
Ordinance No. 63060, declaring the city’s intention to order the necessary electric current to be furnished for a period of fourteen months for lighting purposes, was approved February 26, 1929, and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ex parte LiddellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- State Ex Rel. Burg v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1926
- People v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
- Farmers' Union Ditch Co. v. Rio Grande Canal Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1906
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- County of Fresno v. MalmstromCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Knox v. City of OrlandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Solvang Municipal Improvement District v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Issac v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Downtown Palo Alto Committee for Fair Assessment v. City CouncilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.