Donnelly v. Howard
California Supreme Court
Appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment for defendants, Thomas B. Howard and Mary T. B. Howard, and from an order denying a new trial in the Third District Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Thornton, J.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court:
Action to enforce a lien for a street assessment in San *292Francisco. The defense is that there was included in the assessment, as well as in the demand, a charge of fourteen cents per front foot, amounting in the aggregate to sixteen dollars and eighty cents, for work done which was not authorized by the resolution of intention or the invitation for sealed proposals. The plaintiff meets this defense by the argument that it was the duty of the defendant to appeal to the Board of Supervisors, and that was his only remedy. We do not think so. It was held in Dyer v. Chase, 52 Cal. 440,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dyer v. ChaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877
- Schirmer v. HoytCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by6 opinions
- Perine v. ForbushCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Partridge v. LucasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Ryan v. AltschulCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Evans v. City of HelenaMontana Supreme Court · 1921
- Bates v. HadamsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.