Smith v. Luning Co.

Good Law
111 Cal. 308·1896 Cal. LEXIS 580·43 P. 967
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 21, 1896No. 15940California1,208 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

The plaintiff and the defendant entered into an agreement June 7, 1893, by which the plaintiff was to construct an ironstone pipe sewer in front of the property of the defendant on Leavenworth street, between Greenwich and Lombard streets, in San Francisco, to the satisfaction of the superintendent of streets and highways of said city and county. There was at this time an ordinance in force in the city and *310 county, making it a misdemeanor, punishable with fine or imprisonment, for any person to break up or disturb any public street without the permission of the superintendent of streets and highways, and providing that that officer should not issue a permit for the doing of any street work under a private contract, unless said contract provided for doing the work on the entire length of the block, and was signed by the owners of three-fourths of the frontage of the property in said block. The defendant was the owner of one-fourth of the frontage on Leavenworth street between Greenwich and Lombard, and prior to this date, viz., April 11,1893, one Daniel O’Connor had entered into a contract with the owners of the other three-fourths of the frontage on said street for building a…

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.