City Street Improvement Co. v. Quigley
Before: Wilbur
Synopsis
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. James M. Troutt, Judge. Reversed.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
WILBUR, C. J.
This is an action to recover a street assessment for the improvement of Moraga Avenue, between Eighth and Ninth Avenues. Plaintiff recovered judgment and the defendant appeals. The assessment is a frontage assessment levied under the street improvement ordinance of the city and county of San Francisco, No.
[150]
2685, new series, the provisions of which ordinance have been before this court in a number of recent cases.
(Bienfield
v.
Van Ness,
176 Cal. 585 [169 Pac. 225] ;
City Street Improvement Co.
v.
Pearson,
181 Cal. 640 [20 A. L. R. 1317, 185 Pac. 962];
Federal Const. Co.
v.
Wolf son,
186 Cal. 267 [199 Pac. 512];
Federal Const. Co.
v.
Newhouse,
186 Cal. 284 [199 Pac. 519].) The street assessment first made under the provisions of this ordinance on March 24, 1916, exceeded half the assessed value of the defendant’s lot as shown on the tax assessment-roll for the previous year. Such assessment was expressly prohibited by the charter of the city and county of San Francisco (section 8 of chapter 2 of article VI, and section 33 thereof), and by section 28 of the street improvement ordinance, as no provision was made in the proceedings for the payment of the assessment in installments as required by said section 33 of the charter.
In the absence of such provision we have held that the assessment is void
(City Street Improvement Co.
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)