Mead v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Overton, Lyman & Plumb, and Wm. B. Himrod for Plaintiff, Respondent and Appellant. Edgar G. Pratt and Henry M. Willis for Intervener, Respondent and Appellant. Charles S. Burnell, City Attorney, W. B. Mathews, Lewis E. Whitehead, Ray C. Eberhard and Trent G. Anderson for Defendants and Respondents.
1Opinion of the CourtLennon, J.
Plaintiff, William Mead, brings this action as a taxpayer against the city of Los Angeles and its officials to obtain a judgment decreeing a certain bond issue of the city of Los Angeles unauthorized and void and to restrain the city and its officials from issuing said bonds or expending any part of the proceeds thereof. Mary Ride-out, also a taxpayer, by permission of the lower court, filed a complaint in intervention, joining with the plaintiff in seeking the same relief. Defendant answered plaintiff’s complaint and the complaint in intervention, and the ease was tried, the court rendering…
2Cited by6 opinions
- City & County of San Francisco v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- City of Phoenix v. Superior CourtArizona Supreme Court · 1966
- FRIENDS OF BAY MEADOWS v. City of San MateoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Vela v. HubertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Morrison v. WhiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.