Vincent v. City of Pac. Grove

Citations

• 102 Cal. 405
• 36 P. 773
• 1894 Cal. LEXIS 659

Syllabus

<p>Street Improvement—Grading-—Official Grade—Evidence—Recitals nr Resolution and Notice—Presumption.—Where the resolution, of intention to do street work by grading a portion of a street to the official grade thereof, as established by resolution of the board adopted at a meeting referred to in the resolution of intention, and described as on file at the office of the city clerk, and where the notice posted by the street superintendent, and the resolution ordering the work contained the same statements, if no proof is offered to show that the grade was not established at the time and in the manner indicated, the statement that it was so established must be accepted as true.</p> <p>Id.—Publication of Resolutions—Mistake in Date of Passage.—Where the resolution of intention and the resolution ordering the work to be done, as passed, each showed the true date of its passage, the fact that as published the date of the passage of each of the resolutions was misprinted, is immaterial, the date of the passage not being a part of the resolution, and not required to be published.</p> <p>Id.—Nonsuit—Time For Filing Briefs—Harmless Error.—Where after the denial pro forma of a motion for a nonsuit, the defendant declined to offer any evidence, and the cause was submitted upon briefs, the fact that the court, without the plaintiff’s consent, and before the expiration of the time for presenting the reply brief, entered an order granting a nonsuit and dismissing the action, is a harmless error, and is not ground for a reversal of the judgment for nonsuit, if, upon the case made, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover.</p>