Barnett v. Hunt
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtPierce, P. J.
Plaintiffs-respondents, attorneys in private practice, were employed by Cedar Creek Elementary *522School District hy contract to oppose proceedings by which it was sought to have a portion of the district carved out and included within the boundaries of an adjoining district. The contract provided for studies, preparation of data, representation of the district by the attorneys in a hearing before the Board of Supervisors of Shasta County, and in court proceedings if necessary. Services were performed; the district was successful before the board of supervisors, which denied the petition for the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Jaynes v. StocktonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Ward v. San Diego School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Crane v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Casmalia School District v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
3Cited by1 opinion
- Evans v. BuchananDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1979