South Yuba Water Co. v. City of Auburn
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, P.
This is an action to recover the agreed price for the construction of a concrete culvert at the crossing of the street known as Railroad street, over plaintiff’s canal. The cause was tried by the court and plaintiff had judgment, from which the defendant appeals on the judgment-roll.
The court found the averments of the complaint to be true and the affirmative averments of the answer to be untrue. We have, therefore, only the sufficiency of the complaint to deal with, for it constitutes the findings of the court. The sole question is, Do the findings support the judgment?
It is found…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mock v. City of Santa RosaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Sutton v. StephanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- City of Madera v. Madera Canal & Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
3Cited by4 opinions
- Chapman v. City of FullertonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Ball v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Galiano v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937
- Board of Directors Turlock Irr. Dist. v. City of CeresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953