From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Packard v. Wilson

Supreme Court of California
Mar 1, 1887
72 Cal. 124 (Cal. 1887)

Opinion

         Department Two

          [13 P. 221] Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing to retax costs.

         COUNSEL:

         William & George Leviston, for Appellants.

          J. T. Fleming, and A. Packard, for Respondent.


         OPINION

         THE COURT           [13 P. 222] The complaint is sufficient. The case was litigated on demurrer, and the sixth section of the statute of February 9, 1866 (Stats. 1865-66, p. 68), applies to it. We think it proper to say that it was conceded on the argument by both parties that the statute above referred to is still in force. We decide the case on this concession, and hold nothing as to whether the statute is in force or not.

         Judgment and order affirmed.


Summaries of

Packard v. Wilson

Supreme Court of California
Mar 1, 1887
72 Cal. 124 (Cal. 1887)
Case details for

Packard v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:A. PACKARD, Respondent, v. JOHN D. WILSON et al., Appellants

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Mar 1, 1887

Citations

72 Cal. 124 (Cal. 1887)
13 P. 220

Citing Cases

Golden Gate Lumber Co. v. Sahrbacher

(Cox v. McLaughlin , 52 Cal. 591; 54 Cal. 607; 63 Cal. 205; 76 Cal. 60; 9 Am. St. Rep. 164; Joyce v. White ,…

Fischer v. St. Louis

That permission of the municipal assembly must be obtained before establishing or maintaining a dairy within…