Washburn

Washburn v. Lyons

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 538·97 Cal. 314·32 P. 310
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 16, 1893No. 19008California207 words

Lead Opinion

Haven, J.

The court below sustained a demurrer to the complaint, and thereupon gave judgment for the defendants, and the plaintiff appeals.

The complaint does not allege that the resolution of intention was posted, but it does aver that such resolution was published for two days in a daily paper printed in the city, and designated by the city council for that purpose. The first sentence of section 3 of the act “ to provide for work upon streets .... within municipalities ” (Stats. 1885, p. 147) as amended by the act of March 14, 1889 (Stats. 1889, p. 157), is as follows:

But in another respect the complaint is defective. It fails to show that the contract which is the foundation for the assessment sought to be enforced fixed the time for the commencement and completion of the work to be done thereunder, in accordance with the requirements of section 6 of the act of March 18, 1885, before referred to. In the recent case of Libbey v. Elsworth, post, p. 316, we held this to be an omission fatal to the complaint in this class of actions, and upon the authority of that case, the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Fitzgerald, J., and McFarland, J., concurred.