City Street Improvement Co. v. Babcock
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco; J. M. Seawell, Judge. Action on a street assessment by the City Street Improvement Company against William Babcock. From a judgment for defendant and from an order denying a new trial plaintiff appeals. Reversed.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The complaint alleges that on October 22, 1894, the board of supervisors “duly made and passed” a resolution ordering the work to be done, and also contains allegations of the subsequent proceedings up to and including the recording in the office of the superintendent of the return upon the warrant and assessment. The answer denies that the board of supervisors duly made and passed the resolution ordering the work, and also denies various other allegations of the complaint. The court finds that the board did not duly make or pass any resolution ordering the work. The appellant contends that…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Tregambo v. Comanche Mill & Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1881
- Holman v. Chevaillier's Adm'rTexas Supreme Court · 1855
- Dougherty v. HitchcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Himmelman v. DanosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- McCarthy v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Fulton v. State Ex Rel. General Motors Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1936
- Moore v. GibsonCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 2001
- Commonwealth v. O'Bryan, Utley & Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
- Mosher v. City of PhoenixArizona Supreme Court · 1928
- Dryden v. BurkhartSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1946
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.