True v. Fox
Before: Beatty
Synopsis
The judgment cancels the bond held by the defendant, E. R. Fox and enjoins him from applying for a deed of plaintiff’s property under a sale by the county treasurer for delinquency under the bond.
Opinion
THE COURT.
This is an action to cancel a bond issued upon a street assessment and to enjoin the execution of a deed pursuant to a sale ip. the proceedings. Judgment was given for the plaintiff cancelling the bond. The defendant Fox appeals.
The contract for the street improvement in question required the work to be done under specifications which provided that “All loss or damage arising from the nature of the work to be done under this agreement . . . shall be sustained by the contractor.” The presence of this stipulation, in a street-improvement contract, has been held to render the assessment and all subsequent proceedings therein void, in repeated decisions of this court.
(Blochman
v.
Spreckels,
135
[535]
Cal. 665, 67 Pac. 1061];
Goldtree
v.
Spreckels,
135 Cal. 673, [67 Pac.
1091]; Woollacott
v.
Meekin,
151 Cal. 701, [91 Pac. 612];
Van Loenen
v.
Gillespie,
152 Cal. 222, [96 Pac. 87];
Hatch
v.
Nevills,
152 Cal. 16, [95 Pac. 43];
Stansbury
v.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)