Frick v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Luoien Shaw, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Britt, C.
Plaintiffs claim damages in this action for the alleged prevention of performance, on their part, of the stipulations contained in a certain paper writing, which they say is a contract between themselves and the defendant for the construction-of a public sewer. It is declared by section 207 of the city charter (printed with Stats. 1889, p. 506) that “ the city of Los Angeles shall not be, and is not, bound by any contract, or in any way liable thereon, unless the same is made in writing by order of the council, the draft thereof approved by the council, and the same ordered to be,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Zottman v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
- Santa Cruz Rock Pavement Co. v. BroderickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by15 opinions
- Taylor v. ColeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Williams v. City of StocktonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Hislop v. RodgersArizona Supreme Court · 1939
- In Re Initiative Petition, City of OkmulgeeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Palo and Dodini v. City of OaklandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.