Keating

Keating v. Edgar

Good Law
1884 Cal. LEXIS 783·2 Cal. Unrep. 289·3 P. 594
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 29, 1884No. 9260California1,486 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The only question presented by the record on this appeal is whether the findings support the judgment. We think they do

Judgment affirmed.

We dissent: McKinstry, J.; Ross, J.

Dissenting Opinion

Thornton, J.

I dissent. This is an application for a writ of mandate to be directed to William M. Edgar, auditor of the city and county of San Francisco, commanding him to audit a claim of the petitioner, Keating. The proceeding was instituted in the superior court for the city and county of San Francisco, where judgment was rendered for the applicant, from which the defendant appeals.

The case is substantially as follows:

The applicant was awarded a contract, as the lowest bidder, for certain work to be done on the new city hall. The applicant entered into a contract; performed the work according to such -contract. The lines, levels and heights referred to. in the contract were furnished him after considerable delay by one Clifford, then the architect of the new city hall, whose duty it was to furnish them. At or about the time that the applicant had finished the work aforesaid, “in accordance with the lines, levels, and heights as aforesaid, furnished by said architect Clifford, the said Clifford was discharged for incompetency from his position and place as such architect,” and he thereupon ceased to act. Thereafter, one Hatherton was duly appointed architect for the new city hall in…

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.