Mahoney v. Braverman
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, in the Third District Court, City and County of San Francisco. McKee, J. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Department No. 2, Thornton, J.:
This is an action to enforce an assessment for a street improvement. The improvement referred to is the construction of a cement-pipe sewer, with flushing-hole and cover, in Willow Avenue from Octavia to the center line of Gough Street, and in Gough Street from a point opposite the center line of Willow Avenue to Eddy Street, to connect with the sewer in the crossing of Gough and Eddy Streets. The Court gave judgment for plaintiff. The defendant moved for a new trial, which was denied, and this appeal is prosecuted from the judgment and order of the Court…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Emery v. San Francisco Gas Co.California Supreme Court · 1865
- Dougherty v. HitchcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Billings v. EverettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
- Beveridge v. LivingstoneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
- People v. O'NeilCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by10 opinions
- Municipal Improvement Co. v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Williams v. BerginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Oakland Paving Co. v. Whittell Realty Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
- Bates v. TwistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Remillard v. Blake & Bilger Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.