Stump v. Cornell Construction Co.
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.
Plaintiffs have appealed from a judgment in favor of defendant city of Los Angeles determining that their title to a certain lot is subject to an easement for public alley and utility purposes.
The lot in question is part of a tract subdivided by the defendant Cornell Construction Company. In April, 1941, the company filed with the city a tentative subdivision map which contained no reference to the alley. The proposed subdivision was approved by the city planning commission subject to certain conditions requiring, among other things, that “a future alley 20 feet in width be shown. ...” On May…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- County of Inyo v. GivenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Schmitt v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Myers v. City of OceansideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
- People v. Southern Pacific RailroadCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
3Cited by10 opinions
- T. M. Cobb Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
- DiMartino v. CITY OF ORINDACalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- County of Kern v. Edgemont Development Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1963
- Ratchford v. County of SonomaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Biagini v. BeckhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.