Flinn v. Strauss

HARRISON, P. J.

Action for the foreclosure of the lien of a street assessment in San Francisco. The plaintiffs have appealed from a judgment rendered in favor of the defend

[246]

ants, and have presented the appeal upon the judgment-roll, including a bill of exceptions.

The charter of San Francisco (art. VI, c. I, sec. 16; Stats, of 1899, p. 289) provides that all proposals for public work, including street improvements, “shall be made upon printed forms to be prepared by the board and furnished gratuitously upon application, with a form for the affidavit hereinafter provided for printed thereon. Each bid shall have thereon the affidavit of the bidder that such bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that he has not colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, with any other bidder or person to put in a sham bid, or that such other person shall refrain from bidding; and has not in any manner sought by collusion to secure any advantage against the city and county, or any person interested in said improvement for himself or any other person. All bids shall be clearly and distinctly written without any erasure or interlineation, and if any bid shall have an erasure or interlineation it shall not be received or considered by the board. Any contract made in violation of any of the foregoing provisions, and in case of improvements of streets, any assessment for the work done under such contract, shall be absolutely void. ’ ’

The complaint herein is in the ordinary form, and alleges among other matters that the plaintiffs herein delivered to the board of public works their proposal to do the work for which it had invited sealed proposals, and that their said proposal had thereon the affidavit of each of the plaintiffs setting forth the matters required by the above provisions of the charter. Upon an issue thereon the court found that the alleged proposal “did not have therewith or thereon the affidavit as alleged, or any proper affidavit as required by law.”

The bill of exceptions sets forth at length the alleged proposal of the plaintiffs for doing the work, together with the following, purporting to have been printed thereon, viz.:

“AFFIDAVIT.