Antonelle v. Board of New City Hall Commissioners
JOSEPH S. ANTONELLE v. BOARD OF NEW CITY HALL COMMISSIONERS
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Thomas B. McFarland (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — McFarland
McFarland, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the superior court, in a proceeding in mandamus, commanding the board of new city hall commissioners to allow a certain demand of respondents payable out of the new city hall fund. The transcript consists merely of the pleadings, the judgment, and a notice of appeal therefrom. The case was tried without a jury, and findings were waived. The complaint (or petition) states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and to authorize the issuance of the writ prayed for, and was attacked only by a general demurrer. All the issues made by the pleadings are presumed to have been found in favor of the petitioners. We are unable, therefore, to see any opening for an attack on the judgment.
Judgment affirmed.
De Haven, J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.
Cited by
- O'CONNOR v. Skelton Civ. 6499 · 1962-03-20
- Moreno Mutual Irrigation Co. v. Beaumont Irrigation District Civ No. 3835 Fourth Dist · 1949-11-23
- Childers v. Childers Civ. 15214 · 1946-04-17
- Smith v. McKinstry Civ. 14780 · 1945-05-02
- Stewart v. Langer Civ. 1172 · 1935-08-29
- Green v. Darling Docket No. 4001. · 1925-07-23
- Gray v. Gray L. A. No. 5808. · 1921-04-26