Perrin

Perrin v. Honeycutt

Good Law
144 Cal. 87·1904 Cal. LEXIS 657·77 P. 776
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 8, 1904Sac. No. 1241.California1,214 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Cooper, J.

Defendants demurrer to the plaintiff’s verified petition for a writ of mandate was sustained, and judgment entered in favor of defendant. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment.

It appears, from the petition, that the defendant is and was at all times named therein the county auditor of Madera County. .

That on the second day of October, 1901, by reason of an error and mistake, made by defendant, as auditor, in his estimate of the amount necessary to redeem certain real estate, situate in Madera County, and which had been sold to the state for delinquent taxes, the plaintiff paid to the county treasurer of said county $533.89, in penalties for delinquency, in excess of what was required by law, and in excess of what was due, for the purpose of redeeming the said land; that plaintiff did not know of the said error and mistake in the defendant’s estimate, and that the said sum was paid by reason of the said mistake in the auditor’s estimate and not otherwise; that the mistake was not discovered by plaintiff, and he did not know of the same until January, 1903, and immediately upon discovering said mistake in paying said excess, plaintiff made a demand upon the board of supervisors of…

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.