Legal Opinion

City of Napa v. Rainey

California Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1881No. 7,937PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Application for writ of mandamus. The petition stated that the defendant was elected and qualified as Secretary of the Board of Trustees of the City of Napa.

1Opinion of the Court

McKee, J.:

By Section 6 of an Act of the Legislature of the State, entitled, “An Act to Authorize the Trustees of the City of Napa to Procure a Supply of Wholesome Fresh Water for the Use of the Inhabitants of said City,” approved March 31st, 1876, the Trustees of the city were authorized, in carrying out the provisions of the Act, to issue bonds, from time ■to time, as the same might be deemed necessary, for and in • behalf of the city, not to exceed one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars, of five hundred dollars each, with coupons attached, each payable in gold coin of the United…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hollman v. WarrenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Sherman v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Dormax Oil Co. v. BushCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  4. Lutz v. PostSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1908
  5. Sherman v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API