Legal Opinion
Wheat v. Barrett
California Supreme Court
Decided August 19, 1930No. Docket No. S.F. 14008PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.
In this cause, the opinion of Mr. Justice pro tempore Campbell, heretofore rendered by the Honorable District Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District, has our approval and is, with the exception of the last two paragraphs thereof, hereby adopted as the opinion of this court herein, as follows [ (Cal. App.) 288 Pac. 1092] :
“This is an action to compel the Building Inspector of the City of Piedmont to issue a permit for the erection of a store building upon plaintiffs’ property.
“Defendant’s refusal to issue the permit was based upon the prohibitions contained in ordinance No. 268 of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brett v. Building CommissionerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
- Brougher v. Board of Public Works of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- City of Salem v. MaynesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Andrews v. City of PiedmontCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Wickham v. BeckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Selby Realty Co. v. City of San BuenaventuraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Trans-Oceanic Oil Corp. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Sunny Slope Water Co. v. City of PasadenaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Paramount Rock Co. v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Roselle v. MoonachieNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.