City of San Francisco v. Scott
California Supreme Court
■Appeal from the Fourth Judicial District. This was a submission to the .Court without action upon a case stated. Judgment in favor of plaintiff. Defendant appealed. The facts appear in the opinion of the Court.
Read the full summary
■Appeal from the Fourth Judicial District. This was a submission to the .Court without action upon a case stated. Judgment in favor of plaintiff. Defendant appealed. The facts appear in the opinion of the Court. Cited 6 Wend. 651; Abbott v. Mills, 3 Yt. 521; State v. Oailin, lb. 530; 2 Greenleaf on Evidence, § 662 and notes; Marquis of Stafford v. Cryne, 7 B. & C. 257; State v. Trash, 6 Yt. 355; Cincinnati v. White, 6 Pet. 431, 437, 440; Beg. v. Eostmack, 12 Jur. 332; 3 Bingham, 447 ; 6 Ohio, 288, 303; 7 lb. 217, 219; 9 Cranch, 331; 4 N. H. 537, 545, 546; Dwinel v, Banvard, 2 Law Rep. 339,…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Cli. J. Murray
delivered the opinion of the Court.
Mr. J. Heydeneeldt and Mr. J. Wells concurred.
This suit was originally instituted by complaint before the City Recorder against the defendant for obstructing Commercial street. This street was extended through the property of the defendant and other citizens, by an ordinance of the Common Council of San Francisco. In conformity with the requirements of the charter, assessments were made of the damage to each individual, caused by the opening of the street. Price, who is the real party defendant, was in possession of a portion of the land so…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Ferris v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Aleshire v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad, Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division1923
- Harris v. BlakeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Mulcahey v. DowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900