Brilliant

Brilliant v. Harvey Const. Co.

Good Law
212 F.2d 494·1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3983
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 10, 195413477_1California542 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bone, J.

In 1949 Flintridge Heights, Inc. (herein Flintridge) owned an area of raw land which it planned to subdivide. Pursuant to that plan, in the fall of 1949, it filed a proposed subdivision map with the Regional Planning Commission of the County of Los Angeles. In compliance with California law, see Calif.Bus. & Prof.Code §§ 11500-11628, Flintridge obtained approval of the general plan of subdivision from the Regional Planning Commission, in consideration of Flint-ridge’s dedication of the streets shown upon the map so filed, and Flintridge’s agreement to construct streets and curbs upon the area shown as streets which was so dedicated. Also in accordance with California law, Calif.Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 11611 and 11612, Flintridge deposited with the County $18,000 in lieu of a bond to secure the faithful performance of its agreement to construct streets, in accord with the specifications of the County, within the following twelve months. Time was not made the essence of the agreement, and the County Board of Supervisors was given authority to grant extensions of time.

The aforesaid sum, $18,000 was the estimated cost of performing the agreement. Flintridge obtained the money for that…

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.