Legal Opinion

Aalwyn's Law Institute v. City of San Francisco

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 8, 1919No. Civ. No. 2307PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtWaste, P. J.

Defendant moves to dismiss the appeal. From the record it appears that this is an action brought to recover the sum of $9,592.50 for taxes alleged to have been paid in excess of the dollar limit as provided in section 11, chapter I, article III, of the charter of the city and county of San Francisco. Defendant suffered default for failure to answer, after demurrer sustained, upon which a judgment was entered by the clerk of the court on July 13, 1915, Thereafter, upon motion of defendant, the default judgment was vacated and set aside by an unconditional order of the superior court to that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. William Wolff & Co. v. Canadian Pacific RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Armstrong v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Yarbrough v. YarbroughCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  2. Reeves v. HutsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. Security-First National Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
  4. Hayes v. PierceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. Yarbrough v. YarbroughCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API