Legal Opinion

Brill v. City of Los Angeles

California Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1930No. Docket No. L.A. 11494PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPbeston, J.

This appeal involves alone the question of the propriety under section 26a of the Street Opening Act of 1903 (Deering’s Gen. Laws, Act 8198, p. 3309), of an order directing a reassessment in a proceeding involving the opening, widening and extending of Flower Street from Washington Street to Exposition Boulevard, and the laying out of a new street in prolongation of said Flower Street from Exposition Boulevard, to the intersection of Thirty-eighth and Figueroa Streets in Los Angeles.

This section purports to contain its own measure of power. Power to reassess applies to a case where omission,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Londoner v. City and County of DenverSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  2. Voigt v. Detroit CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1902
  3. Goodrich v. DetroitSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
  4. O. T. Johnson Corp. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Wagoner v. City of La GrandeOregon Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Thain v. City of Palo AltoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  2. County of Riverside v. WhitlockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  3. Capital Freight Lines v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. City of Del Mar v. BurnettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  5. George A. Fuller Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API