Legal Opinion
Meyerfeld v. South San Joaquin Irrigation District
California Supreme Court
Decided April 30, 1935No. S. F. 15271PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.
Mandamus to compel the respondent district and its officers to pay interest and principal on certain outstanding bonds of the district known as the sixth issue.
*412The district, was organized under the California Irrigation District Act (Stats. 1897,- p. 254). Thereafter, pursuant to elections duly held, the district issued and sold numerous bond issues. The first issue was dated July 1, 1910, and constituted bonds in the sum of $1,875,000, to become due serially 1931-1940. A second issue was dated April 18, 1913, due serially 1934-1943, in the sum of $1,170,000. A third issue was dated July 1,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- W. B. Worthen Co. v. KavanaughSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- McDonald v. HoveySupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Hershey v. ColeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- McCoy v. BriantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
- Mulcahy v. BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Martin v. California Mutual Building & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Hammond v. McDonaldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Islais Co., Ltd. v. MathesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- City of Los Angeles v. WattersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Moody v. Provident Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.