Himmelmann v. McCreery (1877) · DecisionDepot

Himmelmann v. McCreery

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1877 No. No. 5182Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court reversed the judgment and remanded the case with instructions to enter judgment for the defendant, based on the authority of cited precedents regarding the resolution of intention and order for street work.

Issues

Whether the resolution of intention and order directing sidewalk construction and reconstruction were legally sufficient.

Disposition. Reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“On the authority of Richardson v. Heydenfeldt, 46 Cal. 68; People v. Ladd, 47 Id. 603, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded, with direction to the court below to enter judgment on the findings in favor of the defendant.”

Synopsis

Stbeet Assessments.—A resolution of intention to improve a street in Sail Francisco, which provides for constructing sidewalks where not already constructed, and for reconstructing them where necessary, does not give the board jurisdiction to perform the work.

By the Court: The resolution of intention, and the order directing the work to be done, provided: “That sidewalks be constructed on Shotwell street, from Fourteenth to Eighteenth streets, where not already constructed; and that the sidewalks thereon be reconstructed where necessary.”

On the authority of Richardson v. Heydenfeldt, 46 Cal. 68; People v. Ladd, 47 Id. 603, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded, with direction to the court below to enter judgment on the findings in favor of the defendant.

Himmelmann v. McCreery

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief