Hastings v. City of San Francisco

Citations

• 18 Cal. 49

Syllabus

<p>Boabds of Supervisors cannot be sued in their official character, in ordinary common law actions, for claims against the public, county or village they represent, without express statutory provision.</p> <p>A judgment obtained in April, 1854, against the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco county, in an ordinary common law action, was not a judgment against the former county of San Francisco.</p> <p>The Act of 1851 creating the Board of Supervisors of San Francisco county, and authorizing the Board “ to sue and defend on behalf of the county,” did not authorize the Board to bring suits on behalf of the county in its own name; nor did it render the Board liable to be sued directly for a claim against the county.</p> <p>Liability to suit has no necessary connection with ability to sue. Boards of Supervisors and bodies like them, without any legislative provision—by general law —are subject, with certain exceptions, to mandamus to enforce the performance of the duties devolved upon them, and to the writ of certiorari, for the review of their acts when partaking of a judicial character, and in other ways are within the control of judicial proceedings.</p> <p>Sunsaclcer v. Borden (5 Cal. 288) and Burgoyne v. The Supervisors of San Francisco (5 Cal. 9) commented on.</p>