Legal Opinion
Behneman v. Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 15, 1960No. Civ. 19352PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBray, P. J.
Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon an order sustaining demurrer without leave to amend.
Questions Presented
This action was brought by taxpayers to determine the validity of bonds issued by defendant transit district for a special transit service district.
1. Is the emergency clause in chapter 116 (Stats. 1959, p. 1967) valid?
2. Was the ordinance calling the bond election void ?(a) Can the transit district incur an indebtedness on behalf of the service district ?
3. Is the service district void because the difference in the two districts is small ?
4. Was a…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Golden Gate Bridge & Highway District v. FeltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- People ex rel. Van Loben Sels v. Reclamation District No. 551California Supreme Court · 1897
- Davis v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Federal Construction Co. v. EnsignCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Martin v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. CambaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Flournoy v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Molesworth v. Secretary of the CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1964
- Azevedo v. JordanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- East Bay Municipal Utility District v. SindelarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.