Legal Opinion

Page v. City of Santa Rosa

California Supreme Court

Decided February 23, 1937No. Sac. 5070PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSea Well, J.

The allegations of plaintiff’s first amended complaint, whereby he prays for injunctive relief, in substance are that the City of Santa Eosa was and is a municipality, organized and existing under a freeholders’ charter and, by virtue of said charter, exercises all its powers of government through the city council; that said city is and for a number of years last past has been the owner of a water system, used and maintained for the purpose of supplying the inhabitants of said city with sufficient water for all ordinary, usual, domestic, household and sanitation purposes; that its Board of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Brass v. . RathboneNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
  2. Waldron v. International Water Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1921
  3. City of Onawa v. Mona Motor Oil Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1934
  4. McCarthy v. HumphreySupreme Court of Iowa · 1898

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Romero v. County of Santa ClaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  2. Moore v. Twentynine Palms County Water DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  3. Shore v. CrailCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API