Edwards

In this case, which is an action to foreclose an assessment lien, defendant contends that the assessment is void for eighteen specified reasons.

The first two points depend upon the alleged lack of power because the resolution of intention calls for curbing where not already done. The objection was overruled in Williams v. Bergin, 116 Cal. 56 . It is held that under such a. contract or resolution nothing is left to be determined, as to the amount of work *546 to be done, by the street superintendent. The board exercises its own judgment in the matter, and delegates nothing to others. (McDonald v. Conniff, 99 Cal. 386 ; Williams v. Bergin, supra.)

The third, fourth, and fifth points are all founded upon the mode of entering orders in the minutes by the clerk of the hoard of supervisors. For the purpose of overcoming the prima facie ease made by the assessment the defendant called the clerk and introduced the records kept by him. ‘All that the minutes disclose in regard to the resolution of intention is as follows: “Supervisor Day also offered a resolution declaring the intention of the board to order the performance of certain street work, which was on motion adopted and numbered…