Mietzsch

Mietzsch v. Berkhout

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 1127·4 Cal. Unrep. 419·35 P. 321
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 30, 1893No. 15,011California1,485 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Belcher, J.

Proceedings were regularly instituted for the widening of Mission street, in the city and county of San Francisco, and for the condemnation for that purpose of a strip of land sixteen and one-half feet wide, along the southeasterly side of said street. The proceedings resulted in a judgment of condemnation and in assessments upon certain lots of land owned by the plaintiff, to help pay the expenses of the improvement. The assessments not being paid, the said lots were sold thereunder to one William Kreling, who received certificates of purchase therefor, and assigned the same to the defendant Amelia Berkhout. There was no redemption of any of the property so sold, and at the proper time the said assignee served on the plaintiff the. usual and required notice, that she would apply for deeds of the lots pursuant to the said sales. The defendant James Gilleran, the then superintendent of streets in and for.the said city and county, was about to execute and deliver the deeds so applied for, and thereupon the plaintiff commenced this action to obtain a decree restraining the execution and delivery thereof. A summons was duly issued and served on each of the defendants, but they failed…

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.