Brannan v. Mecklenburg
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Seventh Judicial District, County of Napa. The complaint averred that the plaintiff owned land in the town of Calistoga, county of Napa, through which the road -which was being opened passed, and that the defendants were Supervisors of the county of Napa, and Boad Master of Boad District No. 9, in said county, in which district the proposed road was located.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Seventh Judicial District, County of Napa. The complaint averred that the plaintiff owned land in the town of Calistoga, county of Napa, through which the road -which was being opened passed, and that the defendants were Supervisors of the county of Napa, and Boad Master of Boad District No. 9, in said county, in which district the proposed road was located. That under the provisions of an Act entitled “ an Act to provide for the establishment, maintenance, and protection of public roads in Napa County,” passed March 31, 1866, the plaintiff and nine others, on…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court :
The viewers are required “ to view the proposed location * * * and decide whether such proposed location * * * is required for public convenience.” (Sec. 5.) “ If, in the opinion of the road viewers, * * * the location is necessary to the public convenience,” they are to cause a survey of the proposed location to be made, etc. (Id.) It is clear that the statute intended that the mind of the petitioners upon the one hand, and of the viewers upon the other, should concur in respect to the propriety of the proposed location of the road—the entire road—mentioned and proposed to be…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Smithers v. FitchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Gascho v. SohlIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
- Hughes v. MermodSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Lowe v. BrannanIndiana Supreme Court · 1886