Himmelmann v. Cahn
This text of 49 Cal. 285 (Himmelmann v. Cahn) 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.
Opinions
We think the judgment should be affirmed. The statute requires that the notice inviting sealed proposals should be conspicuously posted in the office of the Superintendent of Public Streets and Highways for five days. We think this requires that the notice should remain posted in that office for five official days. In other words, it must be posted [288]*288before the commencement of the first day; that is, before 9 o’clock A. m., when, by statute, the office is to be opened, and remain posted during the whole of the first, second, third, fourth, and until 4 o’clock p. m. of the fifth day, at which hour the statute authorizes the office to be closed.
The assessment mentioned in the second count contains no description of the property.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
49 Cal. 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/himmelmann-v-cahn-cal-1874.