Mather v. City & County of San Francisco
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California. Joseph W. Mather, the plaintiff in error, brought an action against the city and county of San Francisco, the defendant in error, to enforce the payment of certain bonds which were issued and sold under the provisions of an act of the legislature of the state of California.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California. Joseph W. Mather, the plaintiff in error, brought an action against the city and county of San Francisco, the defendant in error, to enforce the payment of certain bonds which were issued and sold under the provisions of an act of the legislature of the state of California. St. 1875-76, p. 433. The complaint alleges: That on January 1, 1877, the defendant in error executed the bonds which are the subject of the action for the sum of $1,000 each, and for each bond 40 coupons for the semiannual payment…
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
The question of the right of the plaintiff in error to prosecute the suit against the defendant in error, as and for the purposes set forth in the bill depends upon the principles involved in the discussion of the cases of Jordan v. Cass Co., 3 Dill. 185, Fed. Cas. No. 7,517; Cass Co. v. Johnston, 95 U. S. 360, 24 L. Ed. 416; and Davenport v. Dodge Co., 105 U. S. 237, 26 L. Ed. 1018. In Jordan v. Cass Co. the bonds had been issued by the county court of the county in the name of the county, but on behalf of a township. Although the suit was brought against the county, it was not contended…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Douglass v. County of PikeSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Leffingwell v. WarrenSupreme Court of the United States · 1862
- Carroll County v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- County of Cass v. JohnstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Davie v. BriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Meyer v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Cal. Safe Deposit & Tr. Co. v. Sierra Valleys Ry.California Supreme Court · 1910
- Irvine v. BossenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Rialto Irr. Dist. v. StowellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1917
- Lumbermen's Trust Co. v. Town of RyegateCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.