Legal Opinion
Wolfskill v. City Council of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
Decided July 31, 1918No. L. A. No. 5483. In BankPublishedCited by 13 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
RICHARDS, J., pro tem.
This is an appeal from a judgment in defendants’ favor in a proceeding wherein the plaintiff seeks to review a certain determination of the city council of the city of Los Angeles taken in the course of proceedings for the annexation of certain territory to said city. The proceedings for annexation were instituted under the provisions of the Statute of 1913 as amended in 1915, [Stats. 1915, p. 305], relating to the annexation of inhabited outside territory to an incorporated city. The act contemplates the following steps in the course of such proceedings: Five electors…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Imperial Water Co. v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Stumpf v. Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Smith v. StrotherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Capuchino Land Co. v. Board of TrusteesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
- Bryant v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
3Cited by13 opinions
- Miller & Lux, Inc. v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Abbey v. GreenArizona Supreme Court · 1925
- People Ex Rel. Strong v. City of WhittierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- Bartholomae Oil Corp. v. SeagerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Rancho Santa Margarita v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.