Federal Construction Co. v. Curd
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandate originally made to the Supreme Court to compel a certification of unpaid street assessments. Denied. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. . Morrison, Dunne & Brobeck, Maurice E. Power, and Raymond Benjamin, for Petitioner. Guy Knupp, C. L. Russell, C. L. Russell, Jr., Geo. G. Murry, and Thomas, Beedy & Lanagan, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the Court
RICHARDS, J., pro tem.
This is an application for a writ of mandate by which the petitioner seeks to compel J. E. Curd, as superintendent of streets of the city of Porterville, California, to certify to W. L. Graham, as the treasurer of said city, a list of unpaid assessments upon certain street improvement work alleged to have been done therein by the petitioner, and to direct the said treasurer to issue street improvement bonds thereon, representing the amount of said unpaid assessments. The facts giving rise to this proceeding are practically undisputed and may be stated as follows: In the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hibben v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- People Ex Rel. Chapman v. Sacramento Drainage Dist.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Lent v. TillsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Lent v. TillsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Newport Light Co. v. NewportSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Caminetti v. Pac. Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Cal.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Dacey v. Connecticut Bar Assn.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
- Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. McConnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Elmendorf v. City of San AntonioCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
- Fish v. the State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.