Legal Opinion
City of Oakland v. De Guarda
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 5, 1928No. Docket No. 6401PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BUCK (G. F.), J., pro tem.
This is an action to recover against a defendant street contractor and a defendant surety company upon a statutory surety bond given by the defendants for the faithful performance of a contract for street improvement in the City of Oakland under the provisions of the Street Improvement Act of 1911 (Stats. 1911, p. 730).
Two counts are pleaded in the complaint; the first being on behalf of the City individually, and the second by the City as trustee for the property holders in the assessment district.
The defendant contractor, De Guarda, made default and judgment was…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Equitable Surety Co. v. United States Ex Rel. McMillanSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Sather Banking Co. v. Arthur R. Briggs Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
- Philadelphia v. StewartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Callan v. Empire State Surety Co.California Court of Appeal · 1912
- Los Angeles S. Co. v. National S. Co.California Supreme Court · 1918
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- City of Oakland v. California Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1940
- Board of Supervisors v. Safeco Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Virginia · 1983
- Pacific County v. Sherwood Pacific, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1977
- Six Companies of California v. Joint Highway Dist. No. 13Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940
- Bernard v. Indemnity InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.