Legal Opinion

San Francisco Paving Co. v. Egan

California Supreme Court

Decided May 2, 1905No. S.F. No. 3158PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, J.

This is an action to foreclose the lien of an assessment for street-improvement work. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendants appeal from an order denying their motion for a new trial.

1. It is contended by defendants that the resolution of intention to order the work dqne was invalid for several reasons. Assuming that all the objections made to the resolution are available to defendants on the record before us, we are of the opinion that there is no merit in any of them.

The property upon which jt is sought to enforce a lien fronts on Twenty-ninth Street between Noe and Sanchez streets, in San…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Williams v. BerginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. McDonald v. ConniffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  3. O'Dea v. MitchellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Perine v. ErzgraberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Reid v. ClayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Municipal Improvement Co. v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  2. The Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. JurgensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Boin v. Spreckels Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Canby v. Council of City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Powers v. HolmesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921

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

Powered by the Exa API