Mooney

City of San Francisco v. Mooney

Good Law
106 Cal. 586·1895 Cal. LEXIS 645·39 P. 852
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 25, 1895No. 15686California666 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Henshaw, J.

Appeal by the defendant Delaney from the judgment and from the order denying him a new trial.

*587 The action was commenced by the city and county of San Francisco against the defendants named, and many others, to recover certain lands claimed and held by the defendants adversely to the city. The land claimed by appellant is part of the so-called Lafayette park. Lafayette park was delineated and described as a public park or square upon the Van Ness map. The facts of this case are identical in all essential particulars with those in the case of Hoadley v. San Francisco, 50 Cal. 265 , and Sawyer v. San Francisco, 50 Cal. 370 . The later cases of People v. Holladay, 68 Cal. 442 , Hoadley v. San Francisco, 70 Cal. 324 , San Francisco v. Holladay, 76 Cal. 18 , and People v. Holladay, 93 Cal. 244 ; 27 Am. St. Rep. 186 , follow and reannounce the rule of construction given to the act of the legislature, ratifying ordinances Nos. 822, 845, and the Van Ness map, first declared by the cases reported in the fiftieth volume of our reports.

Moreover, the soundness of the construction put by this court upon the ratifying act of the legislature of March 11, 1858, has been subjected to review…

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.