Crossman

Crossman v. Kenniston

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 550·97 Cal. 379·32 P. 448
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 1893No. 14816California571 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Paterson, J.

The plaintiff filed an accusation against the defendant, who is a member of the board of trustees of the city of San Bernardino, charging him with having willfully violated his official duty as a city trustee, and asking that he be removed from office. It *380 was alleged that while holding the office of trustee he leased a certain building to the city, to be used by the latter as a city hall, and that he received pay for the use of the building; that he also let to divers city officials teams belonging to a firm of livery-stable proprietors, of which he was a member, and collected pay from the city for the use thereof.

A demurrer to the accusation and a motion to dismiss the proceeding were filed and overruled. Thereupon an answer was filed, the cause was heard on the merits, the allegations of the complaint were found to be true, and judgment was entered as prayed for. From this judgment the defendant has appealed.

The act of March 30,1874, provides that any member of any board of officers, state, city, or county, who shall be found guilty of a willful violation of any provision of the statute prescribing or defining his duties, or who shall be found guilty of any other…

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.