People ex rel. Connolly v. City of Coronado

Good Law
100 Cal. 571·1893 Cal. LEXIS 834·35 P. 162
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 28, 1893No. 19239California1,100 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Belcher, J.

A general demurrer to the complaint in this action was sustained by the court below, and, the plaintiff declining to amend, judgment was entered in favor of the defendant, from which the plaintiff appeals.

The facts stated in the complaint are in substance as follows: Under the provisions of section 8 of article XI of the constitution of this state, a charter for the city of San Diego was framed by fifteen freeholders, ratified by a vote of the electors, and on March 16, 1889, approved by the legislature. (Stats. 1889, p. 643.)

On March 19, 1889, an act was passed by the legislature, entitled: “ An act to provide for changing the boundaries of cities and municipal corporations, and to exclude territory therefrom.” (Stats. 1889, p. 356.)

On March 17, 1890, proceedings were commenced, *573 "under the provisions of this act, to change the boundaries of the city of San Diego as described in its said •charter, and to exclude therefrom certain territory known as “ Coronado Beach,” the boundaries of which were specifically described. These proceedings were conducted and carried on in strict conformity to the provisions of the said act, and resulted, in October following, in the…

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.