Brooks v. Satterlee

California Supreme Court

Brooks v. Satterlee

49 Cal. 289

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1874

DocketNo. 3,896

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 49 Cal. 289 (Brooks v. Satterlee) 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

Brooks v. Satterlee, 49 Cal. 289 (Cal. 1874).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court, Niles, J.:

The notice inviting sealed proposals was posted on the 4th of August, 1868, and after the opening of the office of the Superintendent of Public Streets on that day, and contained the announcement that no bids would be received after August 8, 1858, at 4 o’clock p. m. In accordance with our construction of the statute in Himmelmann v. Cahn, ante p. 285, this was not a posting for the full period of five days, as required by law.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Rhodes dissented.

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

By the Court, Niles, J.:

The notice inviting sealed proposals was posted on the 4th of August, 1868, and after the opening of the office of the Superintendent of Public Streets on that day, and contained the announcement that no bids would be received after August 8, 1858, at 4 o’clock p. m. In accordance with our construction of the statute in Himmelmann v. Cahn, ante p. 285, this was not a posting for the full period of five days, as required by law.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Rhodes dissented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 Cal. 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-satterlee-cal-1874.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack