City of Long Beach v. Lisenby
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandate to compel the signing of municipal bonds. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Geo. L. Hoodenpyl, City Attorney, and Bordwell & Mathews, for Petitioner.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
This is a proceeding in mandate to compel the respondents to sign certain bonds of the city of Long Beach, amounting to three hundred thousand dollars, which have been prepared for issuance by the city in pursuance of a vote of the electors thereof at an election called for that purpose.
The bonded indebtedness in controversy was for the purpose of raising funds to pay the expense of improving the harbor of Long Beach “by dredging, deepening, and improving the channels and slips therein and the waterfront thereof,” and by opening a channel to connect said harbor with the inner harbor of Los…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- People v. California Fish Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
- Fragley v. PhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Nicholl v. KosterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Clark v. City of Los AngeLesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Coffey v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Ex Parte DanielsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- West Coast Advertising Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Mallon v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Golden Gate Bridge & Highway District v. FeltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- City of Long Beach v. MarshallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.