Legal Opinion

Bates v. County of Santa Barbara

California Supreme Court

Decided August 21, 1891No. 14372PublishedCited by 37 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County, The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.

— On October 2, 1888, the defendants Booty and Holmes entered into an agreement with the defendant the county of Santa Barbara, to erect for the latter, on a public block in the city of Santa Barbara, a brick building, to be used by the county as a hall of records, for the sum of $19,850. The contract was reduced to writing, but was never signed by any officer of the county. Thereafter, defendant the Star Brick and Supply Company, began the construction of the building under a contract with Booty and Holmes, and prosecuted the same until August, 1889, when Booty and Holmes assumed control of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Mayrhofer v. Board of Education of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. People v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  3. Germania Building & Loan Ass'n v. WagnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
  4. Ripley v. Board of County CommissionersNebraska Supreme Court · 1874
  5. Brennan v. SwaseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. Bank of Italy National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. BentleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Theisen v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  3. French v. PowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Chamberlain v. City of LewistonIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Reclamation District No. 551 v. County of SacramentoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

32 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