Hooker

Hooker v. East Riverside Irrigation District

Good Law
1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 150·38 Cal. App. 615·177 P. 184
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 12, 1918Civ. No. 2602.California2,842 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Myers, J.

The plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the superior court entered upon an order sustaining defendant’s demurrer to her amended and supplemental complaint (hereinafter referred to as “the complaint”) without leave to amend. The demurrer is both general and special, the latter presenting numerous grounds, of which we deem it necessary to consider here only those which plead the statute of limitations. All of the special statutes of limitation which may be appropriate thereto are pleaded by the demurrer to any and every cause of action alleged in the complaint.

Prom the allegations of the complaint the following facts appear: The defendant and respondent East Riverside Irrigation District is a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the provisions of the “Wright Act,” [Stats. 1887, p. 29], and in 1890 had duly taken all of the steps necessary under the act for the creation of a bonded indebtedness in the sum of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Thereupon its board of directors instituted in the superior court of San Bernardino County, wherein it was situate, an action in rem pursuant to an amendment to said act, wherein, in December, 1891, a decree was…

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.