Legal Opinion

Municipal Bond Co. v. City of Riverside

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 24, 1934No. Civ. No. 1427PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.

This action was instituted by the holder of certain street improvement bonds issued pursuant to the provisions of the Improvement Act of 1911 (chap. 397, Stats. 1911, p. 730) to recover from the city treasurer of the City of Riverside and from the surety on his official bond and from the City of Riverside the sum of $2,758.93 which it was alleged had been paid to said city treasurer by the owners of property upon which assessments had been levied to pay the cost of street improvements and for which assessments bonds had been issued and which said sum was alleged to have been appropriated by…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. City of Pasadena v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Kellar v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Pittam v. City of RiversideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. Isenberg v. ShermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Trumpler v. TrumplerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Fernelius v. PierceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Gibson Properties Co. v. City of OaklandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  3. In Re RothrockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  5. Markwort v. McGeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951

21 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