Pacific Paving Co. v. Bolton
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.
This is an action to foreclose the lien of a street assessment. The only question presented on appeal is as to the sufficiency of the allegations of the complaint.
*9Appellant contends that the complaint is insufficient, because it is not alleged that before ordering the work done the council passed a resolution of intention so to do, or that the superintendent posted or published the notice required by section 3 of the act under which the work was done. The complaint, however, alleges that “ on the twenty-fourth day of July, 1888, the city council of the city and county of San Francisco,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Himmelman v. DanosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
3Cited by16 opinions
- City of Montesano v. BlairWashington Supreme Court · 1895
- Gurnsey v. Northern California Power Co.California Court of Appeal · 1908
- Williams v. BerginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- City Street Improvement Co. v. BabcockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Bituminous Lime Rock Paving & Improvement Co. v. FultonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.