Brandon v. State

California Supreme Court

Brandon v. State

19 Cal. 2d 877

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 4, 1942

DocketS. F. No. 16037

StatusPublished

This text of 19 Cal. 2d 877 (Brandon v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brandon v. State, 19 Cal. 2d 877 (Cal. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

CARTER, J. —

This is one of several cases in which an appeal has been taken by the defendant from a judgment rendered against it for damages allegedly sustained by the plaintiff as the result of the construction of an improvement in the street or highway fronting the plaintiff’s property. The facts in each case are substantially the same, although the amount of damage in each instance varies. For the injury to his property, plaintiff herein was awarded the sum of $750. All material legal questions here presented are determined by our decision this day filed in the case of Rose v. State of California, No. 16040, ante, p. 713 [103 Pac. (2d) 505]. Upon the authority of and for the reasons set forth therein the judgment appealed from herein is affirmed.

Shenk, J., Curtis, J., and Houser, J., concurred.

Appellant’s petition for a rehearing was denied April 2, 1942. Gibson, C. J., Edmonds, J., and Traynor, J., voted for a rehearing.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CARTER, J. —

This is one of several cases in which an appeal has been taken by the defendant from a judgment rendered against it for damages allegedly sustained by the plaintiff as the result of the construction of an improvement in the street or highway fronting the plaintiff’s property. The facts in each case are substantially the same, although the amount of damage in each instance varies. For the injury to his property, plaintiff herein was awarded the sum of $750. All material legal questions here presented are determined by our decision this day filed in the case of Rose v. State of California, No. 16040, ante, p. 713 [103 Pac. (2d) 505]. Upon the authority of and for the reasons set forth therein the judgment appealed from herein is affirmed.

Shenk, J., Curtis, J., and Houser, J., concurred.

Appellant’s petition for a rehearing was denied April 2, 1942. Gibson, C. J., Edmonds, J., and Traynor, J., voted for a rehearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 Cal. 2d 877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brandon-v-state-cal-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack