Legal Opinion

Sechrist v. Rialto Irrigation District

California Supreme Court

Decided September 5, 1900No. L.A. No. 678PublishedCited by 18 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

CHIPMAN, C.

Action to have certain one thousand bonds of defendant district, in part issued and in part unissued, adjudged void; to compel each of certain defendants to disclose the bonds held by him, and to bring them into court to be canceled and destroyed, and meanwhile to restrain the transfer of such bonds; to enjoin the district from levying any assessment to pay any interest upon all or any of said bonds, and for general relief.

Defendants demurred to tbe complaint on several grounds. The court sustained the demurrers on the ground of insufficiency of facts and overruled them on all…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Brownell v. . Town of GreenwichNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  2. Spect v. SpectCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Chase v. City Treasurer of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Hughson v. CraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  5. People v. Central Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Stowe v. Fritzie Hotels, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Moss v. MossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Depue v. MillerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Haddad v. McDowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  5. MacLeod v. StelleIdaho Supreme Court · 1926

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API