From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McNaughton v. City of Glendale

Supreme Court of California
Dec 5, 1929
208 Cal. 786 (Cal. 1929)

Opinion

Docket No. L.A. 10096.

December 5, 1929.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Ruben S. Schmidt, Judge. Affirmed.

Chas. S. Conner for Appellant.

W. Turney Fox, City Attorney, Bernard Brennan, Deputy City Attorney, Ray L. Morrow, City Attorney, and Frank M. Moody, Deputy City Attorney, for Respondents City of Glendale and Ruth Kerns.

Arthur M. Ellis for Respondent E.L. Fleming.


THE COURT.

This cause relates to street improvement proceedings which, although instituted under a resolution of intention bearing a different number, are otherwise identical with and were started the same day as those referred to in case No. 10085, Woodill v. City of Glendale, ante, p. 564 [ 282 P. 797], this day decided. The pleadings in the two actions are in the same form and the law points made are identical. [1] Therefore, upon authority of said cause, Woodill v. City of Glendale, supra, and upon the same grounds and for all the reasons set forth therein, the judgment rendered in this cause for defendants upon the sustaining of their demurrers, without leave to amend, is hereby affirmed.


Summaries of

McNaughton v. City of Glendale

Supreme Court of California
Dec 5, 1929
208 Cal. 786 (Cal. 1929)
Case details for

McNaughton v. City of Glendale

Case Details

Full title:W.R. McNAUGHTON, Appellant, v. THE CITY OF GLENDALE (a Municipal…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Dec 5, 1929

Citations

208 Cal. 786 (Cal. 1929)
282 P. 797