Legal Opinion

Blattman v. Gadd

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 20, 1931No. Docket No. 7315PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, J., pro tem.

The plaintiff, a land owner and taxpayer within Reclamation District No. 1001, brought this action on behalf of. himself and others similarly situated. The purpose of the action was to have declared null; and void and to rescind a certain contract of employment entered into between the trustees of Reclamation District No. 1001, on behalf of said district, and appellant Charles F. Metteer. Further, plaintiff sought, as part of the relief necessarily incident to the cancellation of the contract, the return to the Reclamation District of certain outstanding, warrants…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Chapman v. Sacramento Drainage Dist.California Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Anderson v. EatonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Colton v. StanfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  4. In Re Sutter-Butte By-Pass Assessment No. 6California Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Bottoms v. Madera Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Forsher v. BugliosiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  2. King v. FoxNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
  3. Edward C. KING, Appellant, v. Lawrence A. FOX, AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
  4. Gelfand, Greer, Popko & Miller v. ShivenerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
  5. Jacklich v. BaerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API