Wright v. Bd. of Pub . Works of L.A.
California Supreme Court
APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County denying motions for a temporary injunction. George H. Hutton, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.
The plaintiffs appeal from two orders denying successive motions for a temporary injunction.
The plaintiffs are owners of various tracts of land upon which the authorities of the city of Los Angeles undertook, in attempted compliance with the provisions of the Street Opening Act of 1903 (Stats. 1903, p. 376), to levy assessments to pay the damages and costs to be incurred in the widening of Sunset Boulevard in said city. The complaint describes the several -parcels of land affected, alleges that they are owned by the respective plaintiffs, and states the amount “pretended to be assessed”…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Clark v. WillettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Foster v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Gardner v. StroeverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Bradley v. VoorsangerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Weaver v. ReddyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Bisno v. SaxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Boggs v. North American Bond & Mortgage Co.California Supreme Court · 1936
- County of Los Angeles v. ButcherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Bernard v. WeaberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- Bo Kay Chan v. Gerdon Land Co.California Court of Appeal · 1951
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.