Himmelmann v. Satterlee

Decided July 1, 1874

California Supreme Court · decided 1874-07-01

Action to recover the amount of an assessment for street work in San Francisco. The plaintiff recovered judgment, and the defendants appealed. The other facts are stated in the opinion.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1915

1 state decisions

Relies on Donnelly v. Tillman

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1874-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court, Rhodes, J.:

¶1It is alleged in the complaint that the Board of Supervisors caused due notice of the award of the contract to be. published, etc., for the requisite period. It was proved that the Board never passed any ordinance or resolution directing the publication of the resolution of award; but that the Clerk of the Board published it without being authorized or directed so to do.

¶2It was held in Donnelly v. Tillman (47 Cal. 40), that it was the duty of the Board of Supervisors to order the notice of the award of the contract to be published; and that the publication was not legal or sufficient unless made in pursance of an order of the Board. That case has repeatedly been affirmed in this Court.

¶3Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial. Remittitur forthwith.

¶4Mr. Justice Niles did not express an opinion.