Esaisa v. Superior Court of Sonoma County

California Supreme Court

Esaisa v. Superior Court of Sonoma County

279 P. 992, 207 Cal. 796, 1929 Cal. LEXIS 577

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 31, 1929

DocketDocket No. S.F. 13283.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 279 P. 992 (Esaisa v. Superior Court of Sonoma County) 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

Esaisa v. Superior Court of Sonoma County, 279 P. 992, 207 Cal. 796, 1929 Cal. LEXIS 577 (Cal. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

This matter comes to us upon a petition for a writ of review to determine the legality of the findings and judgment and other proceedings leading up to the formation of the proposed Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, which matter has been determined by the *Page 797 defendant Superior Court contrary to the contentions of petitioner. [1] The questions raised have all been disposed of in a case from the county of Napa, California, involving precisely the same legal situation, which case has been this day decided by this court. (Wheatley v. Superior Court et al. [S.F. No. 13281 of the records of this court], ante, p. 722 [279 P. 989].)

For the reasons stated in the case last cited, the proceedings are affirmed.

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

THE COURT.

This matter comes to us upon a petition for a writ of review to determine the legality of the findings and judgment and other proceedings leading up to the formation of the proposed Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, which matter has been determined by the *Page 797 defendant Superior Court contrary to the contentions of petitioner. [1] The questions raised have all been disposed of in a case from the county of Napa, California, involving precisely the same legal situation, which case has been this day decided by this court. (Wheatley v. Superior Court et al. [S.F. No. 13281 of the records of this court], ante, p. 722 [279 P. 989].)

For the reasons stated in the case last cited, the proceedings are affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 P. 992, 207 Cal. 796, 1929 Cal. LEXIS 577, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/esaisa-v-superior-court-of-sonoma-county-cal-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack