Legal Opinion

Schofield v. City of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 27, 1932No. Docket No. 4453PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MILLER, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon the sustaining of a demurrer without leave to amend. The action was brought May 31, 1928, to have ordinance No. 60133 of the City of Los Angeles declared void, and for injunctive relief. The original complaint was demurred to and the demurrer was sustained. Thereupon appellants filed an amended complaint, to which a demurrer, both general and special, was interposed and sustained upon the general ground, without leave to amend, hence this appeal.

It is alleged that prior to the passage of ordinance No. 60133, and on October 19,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wheeler v. HerbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Davis v. HartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Ertle v. LearyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Herzo v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Anderson v. I. M. Jameson Corp.California Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Brock v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Lauterbach v. City of CentraliaWashington Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Hopkins v. MacCullochCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  5. City of Palo Alto v. Pub. Emp't Relations Bd., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2016

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

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

Powered by the Exa API