Woodruff v. Perry
Before: Haven
Synopsis
Irrigation District—Assessment Hot Authorized by Vote—Injunction.—An assessment of an irrigation district to defray the expenses of organization, including the salaries of officers and employees, which has not been authorized by a vote of the electors of the district, is illegal, and an injunction will be granted to enjoin the enforcement of its collection by a sale of property upon which the tax has become delinquent.
De Haven, J. The assessment referred to in the complaint not having been authorized by a vote of the electors of the Otay Irrigation District, was illegal under the rule announced in the case of Tregea v. Owens, 94 Cal. 317; and inasmuch as the invalidity of such assessment would not appear upon the face of the deed given to the purchaser at the sale made for the purpose of collecting the delinquent tax levied by such assessment, the plaintiffs are entitled to the injunction given by the judgment appealed from. (Pixley v. Huggins, 15 Cal. 127; Burr v. Hunt, 18 Cal. 303.)
Judgment affirmed.
Fitzgerald, J., and McFarland, J., concurred.
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)