Williams v. McDonald
Citations
- 58 Cal. 527
- 1881 Cal. LEXIS 258
Syllabus
<p>Street Assessment—Printed Signature.—In an action for the foreclosure of a street assessment: Held, That the printed signature of the Clerk to the resolution of intention was sufficient.</p> <p>Id.—Practice-—Appeal.—Held, further, that a point not made in the Court below, could not be considered in this Court for the first time.</p> <p>Id.—Diagram—Description—Points op Compass—Scroll.—Held, further, that under the decision in Whiting v. Quackenbush, 54 Cal. 306, the diagram was sufficient.</p>
Judges: Myrick
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Weiner v. MullaneyCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1943-07-09· cited 32×
- People v. PeckCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1974-05-02· cited 20×
- Labs v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court· 1895-07-03· cited 18×
- Smith v. OstlyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1959-12-18· cited 5×
- Yaeger v. Southern California Railway Co.California Supreme Court· 1897-12-09· cited 3×
Cites
1 case in this archive is cited by this case.
Other cases named Williams v. McDonald
7 other CourtListener records share this case name.
- Williams v. McDonaldTexas Supreme Court· 1855-07-01· cited 5×
- Williams v. McDonaldE.D. Virginia· 1999-09-28· cited 2×
- Williams v. McDonaldSupreme Court of New Jersey· 1886-11-15· cited 2×
- Williams v. McDonaldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine· 1841-04-15
- Williams v. McDonaldBeaver County Court of Common Pleas· 1901-12-15
- Williams v. McDonaldSupreme Court· 2016-10-03
- Williams v. McDonaldSupreme Court· 2016-11-28
Sourced 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.