Smith v. Board of Supervisors

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 650·99 Cal. 262·33 P. 1094
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 15, 1893No. 19122California591 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Garoutte, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the superior court of the county of San Bernardino commanding the board of supervisors of said county to take action on the claim of plaintiff, filed on the twenty-seventh day of October, 1891, before the said board of supervisors, by approving or rejecting the claim. Plaintiff filed a claim against the county of San Bernardino based upon the same contract which is relied upon in the present litigation, and the claim was rejected by the board. After six months had expired from the date of such rejection, but within one year from the date when the liability accrued, plaintiff filed a second claim based upon the same contract. The board of supervisors refused either to reject or approve this claim, upon the ground that the same claim had been previously rejected and the law did not require further action in the premises, and this proceeding by mandamus followed.

There is no issue of fact in the case. Both claims are before the court, and the only question to be determined is, Upon a comparison can it be said that there is a material difference between these claims? We believe they differ in important respects. The contract for the bridge work…

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.