Partridge v. Lucas
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment oí the Superior Court of Marin County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtDe Haven, J.
This is an action to recover upon a street assessment. In the superior court a demurrer to the complaint was sustained, and judgment thereupon rendered for defendant. Plaintiffs appeal.
1. It is well settled that “the passage and publication of the resolution of intention are acts by which the board acquires *520jurisdiction; and by those acts they acquire jurisdiction to make only such improvements as they described in the resolution, and they cannot, therefore, lawfully cause work other than that which is described to be performed.” (Beaudry v. Valdez, 32 Cal. 276; Himmelman v. Satterlee, 50…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Emery v. San Francisco Gas Co.California Supreme Court · 1865
- Perine v. ForbushCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- McNamara v. EstesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1867
- Beaudry v. ValdezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Dyer v. ChaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Osburn v. StoneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Sharum v. City of MuskogeeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Ferguson v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1922
- Ryan v. AltschulCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- McAllister v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1894
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.