Young

Young v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
1927 Cal. App. LEXIS 231·86 Cal. App. 13·260 P. 798
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 11, 1927Docket Nos. 5525, 5526.California6,088 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Works, J.

The second cause above entitled, City of Los Angeles v. Morris, No. 5526 in the files of this court, is an action for the condemnation of real property for street purposes. It was commenced pursuant to the provisions of an act of the legislature commonly known as the act of 1903 (Stats. 1903, p. 376; and, as variously amended, Act 8198, Deering’s Gen. Laws 1923), and such proceedings were had that an interlocutory decree of condemnation was entered in the action. From this decree the defendant Annie F. Young, appellant here, in due time prosecuted an appeal and the interlocutory decree was affirmed (City of Los Angeles v. Morris, 74 Cal. App. 473 [ 241 Pac. 409 ]). Six months after the filing of the affirming opinion the supreme court rendered a decision in which it is now contended that questions of law were settled which strike at the very foundation of the proceedings involved in City of Los Angeles v. Morris . This decision of the supreme court was pronounced in O. T. Johnson Corp. v. City of Los Angeles, 198 Cal. 308 [ 245 Pac. 164 ]. Thereafter defendant Young made her motion in the trial court in City of Los Angeles v. Morris , pursuant to notice filed about May 18, 1926,…

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.