Thomason v. Ruggles
Citations
- 69 Cal. 465
- 11 P. 20
- 1886 Cal. LEXIS 671
Syllabus
<p>Street Work—San Francisco—Certain Acts Construed—Constitutional Law.—The application was for a writ of mandate to compel the defendant, as superintendent of streets of the city and county of San Francisco, to enter into and execute a certain contract for curbing and paving a portion of a street in the city and county, and constructing sidewalks thereon. The proceedings for the work were taken under the act of April 1, 1872, amending the charter of the city and county. At the time the demand was made on the superintendent to execute the contract, no assessment had been levied or collected for the proposed work, as required by section 19 of article 11 of the constitution of 1879. Held by MyricJc, J., Boss, J., and Morrison, O. J., that the act of April 1, 1872, so far as it authorized the doing of street work without a previous levy and collection of an assessment, was repealed by section 19 of article 11 of the constitution, and was not revived by the amendment of November 4, 1884, dispensing with the necessity of such previous levy and collection of the assessment; that the amendment was constitutionally adopted, and that the act of March 18, 1885, providing for street work in municipalities, and repealing the act of March 6, 1883, was a general law within the meaning of the constitution, and was in force in the city and county of San Francisco.</p> <p>Id. —Held by McKee, J., that the act of April 1,1872, was repealed by section 19 of article 11 of the constitution; that the amendment of 1884 was not constitutionally adopted, because it had not been entered at large on the journals of the legislature, and that consequently the act of March 18, 1885, was invalid, and that the act of March 6, 1883, was in force in the municipalities of the state.</p> <p>Id. —Held by McKinstry, J., and Sharpstein, J., that the act of April 1,1872, was not repealed by the constitution; that the act of March 18, 1885, was not a general law within the meaning of section 6 of article 11
Judges: McKee, McKinstry, Myrick, Ross, Sharpstein, Thornton
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.