Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

53 Cal. 49

Brady v. Feisel

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1878

California Supreme Court · decided 1878-07-01

<p>Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco.</p> <p>The action was brought to recover a street assessment in San Francisco, under the law as it stood April 26th, 1869. At the trial it appeared that the resolution of intention, order, proposals, award, contract, and assessment were all for grading, and were regular; but in one place in the notice the word “ regrading ” was used by mistake, instead of the word “ grading.”</p> <p>Judgment was rendered for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed.</p>

Decided 1878-07-01

By the Court :

¶1The resolution of intention was to grade the street. The notice inviting sealed proposals was “ for grading ” the street, and referred to the resolution (No. 9,772). As explanatory, the notice inviting sealed proposals also informed bidders that the street mentioned was to be “regraded.” This was nothing more than to say that the street to be graded had once before been graded, and that it had become necessary to do the work over again. We see nothing in this which vitiates the notice for sealed proposals.

¶2Judgment reversed and cause remanded, with directions to render judgment for the plaintiff upon the findings. Remittitur forthwith.

/53/cal/49 · .json · Public domain