Bergin

Williams v. Bergin

Good Law
1899 Cal. LEXIS 1154·6 Cal. Unrep. 299·57 P. 1072
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 12, 1899S. F. No. 1027California517 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Henshaw, J.

This is an action to foreclose the lien of a street assessment. Defendants interposed a demurrer, both general and special. The demurrer was sustained, and, plaintiffs declining to amend, judgment was entered against them. From this judgment they appeal.

The suit was upon a second assessment ordered by the board of supervisors after a successful appeal by the plaintiffs from the first assessment. The board of supervisors acts judicially in hearing and determining such an appeal. Its jurisdiction is limited, and the mode prescribed by the statute for. acquiring jurisdiction must be strictly followed. Not only this, but, when reliance is had upon the judgment of such a tribunal as the foundation for an asserted right, it must be shown by proper averment that the tribunal had jurisdiction to render the judgment in question: Williams v. Bergin, 108 Cal. 169 , 41 Pac. 287 . By the statute the time of appeal is limited upon the date of the warrant. The party aggrieved shall appeal “within thirty days after the date of the warrant’’: Street Law (Stats. 1885, p. 156), sec. 11. We might be willing to hold that an appeal from an assessment taken before the *300 date of the warrant would he…

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.