McKevitt v. City of Sacramento
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWaste, P. J.
The plaintiffs instituted this action against the City of Sacramento, and the city commissioners of that municipality, to reform and to enforce a purported contract for the purchase by the city of a tract of land for park purposes. They' also sought an injunction to restrain •the defendants from expending the proceeds derived from a certain bequest in any other manner than in accordance with the terms of the contract alleged to exist. The trial court entered an interlocutory decree in favor of the plaintiffs as prayed for, and defendants have appealed.
The undisputed facts in the case, set out…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Hopping v. Council of City of RichmondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Horton v. MurdenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Watson v. SutroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Best v. WohlfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Argus Co. v. . Mayor, Etc., of AlbanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- Birkenfeld v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Collins v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Redevelopment Agency v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Beverage v. Canton Placer Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
- Renner v. CrismanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1964
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.