Thain

Thain v. City of Palo Alto

Good Law
1962 Cal. App. LEXIS 1895·207 Cal. App. 2d 173·24 Cal. Rptr. 515
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 29, 1962Civ. 20025California7,451 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sullivan, J.

In this action involving a weed abatement ordinance of the City of Palo Alto, hereafter referred to as City, the plaintiff, a property owner, appeals from a judgment in favor of the above municipality, its assessor and its superintendent of public works. Although represented by counsel below, plaintiff and appellant appears here in propria persona.

Ordinance No. 1313, which is the center of the present controversy, was adopted by the Council of the City of Palo Alto on November 27, 1950, its introductory language reciting that " an emergency exists for the passage of this ordinance; . . . ” We first set forth its terms in substance: Section 32.01 provides that no owner or other specified person occupying or having charge of any building, lot or premises shall permit weeds to remain on such premises or public sidewalks or streets, or alleys between said premises and the center line of any public street or alley. “Weeds” means “all weeds growing upon streets, alleys, sidewalks, or private property” including weeds which bear or may bear seeds of a downy or wingy nature, weeds and grasses which may attain such large growth as to become, when dry, a fire menace, weeds otherwise…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.