Greenwood

Greenwood v. Hassett

Good Law
1900 Cal. LEXIS 1080·6 Cal. Unrep. 430·61 P. 173
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 14, 1900S. F. No. 1567California431 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Action to foreclose the lien of a street assessment. The defendants demurred to the complaint upon the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The court overruled the demurrer, and, the defendants having answered, the cause was tried by the court, and judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiffs. The defendants have appealed.

The demurrer to the complaint was properly overruled by the court.

1. It was not necessary to set forth in the complaint the specifications attached to the contract, and which formed a part thereof: California Improvement Co. v. Reynolds, 123 Cal. 88 , 55 Pac. 802 .

2. The objection that there is no sufficient allegation of a demand upon the lot has been obviated by the stipulation filed herein correcting the transcript as originally printed.

3. The notice of the passage of the resolution of intention was properly posted by the superintendent of streets. The complaint alleges that the clerk of the board of supervisors on the sixth day of December, 1893, posted the resolution of intention, and kept the same so posted for two days, and that on the eighth day of December, 1893, the superintendent of streets caused…

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.