Southern Pacific Co. v. County of Riverside
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
MARKS, J. —
This is an action to recover $1540.58, taxes paid under protest to defendant for the use of the Coachella Valley Storm Water District. A demurrer was sustained to the complaint. Plaintiffs failed to amend within the time allowed and the judgment from which this appeal is taken was entered. The grounds of special demurrer are not argued. We therefore assume they have been abandoned.
The Coachella Valley Storm Water District, which we will refer to as The District, was organized under the Storm Water District Act of 1909. (Stats. 1909, p. 339, as amended.) Certain pertinent facts of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- In Re HainesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Cavender v. HewittTennessee Supreme Court · 1921
- Crowe v. BoyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Fresno City High School District v. De CaristoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- People v. RabeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Womack v. WomackTexas Supreme Court · 1943
- Stamps v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- In Re Shafter-Wasco Irr. Dist.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- People Ex Rel. Mosk v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Insurance Co. of North America v. VentlingWyoming Supreme Court · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.