Lent v. Tillson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1ConcurrenceMcKinstry, J.
I concur in the order or judgment directing the court below to dismiss the complaint.
1. If there were irregularities in the proceedings to widen Dupont Street, which did not deprive the plaintiffs of opportunities to contest them, they should have been objected to in the course of the proceedings. If the statute is a valid statute, but it appears from the record that there were omissions, defects, or departures from the procedure prescribed by the statute, which render the assessment of the commissioner's, or judgment of the County Court invalid,—for want of jurisdiction of the persons or…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Heywood v. . the City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- Palmer v. StumphIndiana Supreme Court · 1868
- People ex rel. Whitney v. Board of Delegates of San Francisco Fire DepartmentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Wiggin v. Mayor of New-YorkNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.