Jennings v. Le Breton

Citations

• 80 Cal. 8
• 21 P. 1127
• 1889 Cal. LEXIS 849

Syllabus

<p>San Francisco — Street Assessment — Completion op Work—Improper Acceptance — Remedy by Appeal.—Under section 12 of the act of April 1, 1872, if the contractor for a street improvement in San Francisco fails properly to complete the work according to contract, and the work is improperly approved or accepted by the superintendent of streets before completion, the only remedy for lot-owners assessed for. the improvement, is to appeal to the board of supervisors.</p> <p>Id.—Proop op Acceptance by Superintendent.—The assessment and warrant attached are prima facie evidence that work on a street improvement was done to the satisfaction of the superintendent. The superintendent may approve the work upon the certificates of the city surveyor and deputy superintendent without personal inspection, and proof of lack of personal inspection by him does not overcome the proof of acceptance from those certificates showing that the work was completed according to contract, taken in connection with the personal making and signing of the assessment, diagram, and warrant hy the superintendent.</p> <p>Id. —Validity of Assessment — Apportionment in Proportion to Frontage. — A street assessment, may be apportioned in proportion to frontage of the land assessed on the improvement, without other reference to benefits.</p> <p>Estates of Deceased Persons—Resignation of Administrator—Revocation of Letters—Appointment of New Administrator—-Presumption. — When the record of the probate court shows the resignation of a former administrator, and the settlement of his final account, and the appointment of a new administrator after the date of such settlement, it must he presumed in favor of the action of the court that the former administrator delivered the assets into the custody of the court, or to a. person appointed to receive it, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, and that all conditions existed which were necessary to authorize the new appointment. The action of the court was equ