United Railroads of S.F. v. Colgan
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco,'and from an order refusing a new trial. J. M. Seáwell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, and George A. Sturtevant, Deputy Attorney-General, for Appellant. William G. Burke, City Attorney, A. S. Newburgh; Assistant City Attorney, Percy Y. Long, City Attorney, and William I. Brobeck, Assistant City Attorney, for Respondent.
1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, J.
The state board of equalization claimed the_right to assess and assessed for the fiscal year 1903-1904, the franchise, roadway, roadbed, rails, and rolling-stock of plaintiff, a corporation having its principal place of business in the city and county of San Francisco, upon the theory that such railroad was a “railroad” operated in more than one county (Const., art. XIII, sec. 10). The assessors of the city and county of San Francisco and San Mateo County, the two counties in which plaintiff operates its railroad system, claimed the fight to assess and assessed the "portions thereof legally…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- San Francisco & San Mateo Electric Railway Co. v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
3Cited by3 opinions
- Estate of HughesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Maxwell Hardware Co. v. FosterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Huntington v. CurryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910