Horton v. City of Los Angeles
Citations
- 119 Cal. 602
- 51 P. 956
- 1898 Cal. LEXIS 681
Syllabus
<p>Municipal Corporations—Proceedings to Sell Telephone Franchise— Abatement—Repeal op Act—Substitution oe New Act.—Proceedings had for the sale of a telephone franchise by a city council under the act of March 23, 1893, could not be carried to a conclusion after the repeal of that act, and the taking effect of the act of May 12, 1897, which supersedes it; but any proceedings had under the former act became functus officio after May 11, 1897, and could not be perfected or completed under the act of 1897.</p> <p>Id.—Injunction to Restrain Sale —Dissolution—Appeal after Taking Effect of New Act—Presumption—Dismissal.—Where an injunction to restrain a sale of a telephone franchise under the act of 1893, was dissolved May 10, 1897, the dissolution left the city council free to act, and, when no appeal was taken until nearly two months after that act had ceased to be a law, it must be presumed that if the council proceeded after May 11, 1897, it proceeded under the new act, and as, in any event, the restoration of the injunction would avail nothing, the appeal from the order dissolving the injunction should be dismissed without prejudice.</p>
Judges: Chipman
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.