Santa Clara Valley Mill & Lumber Co. v. Board of Supervisors

12 P. 129, 71 Cal. 268, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 571
California Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1886·No. No. 9698·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

The Court.

The clerk had no authority to enter the judgment for costs while a motion to retax was pending. (Riddell v. Harrell, No. 11363, ante, p. 254.)

Judgment affirmed.

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

Santa Clara Valley Mill & Lumber Co. v. Board of Supervisors, 12 P. 129, 71 Cal. 268, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 571 (Cal. 1886).

12 P. 129 (Santa Clara Valley Mill & Lumber Co. v. Board of Supervisors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chastain v. Crossfield
11 P.2d 1011 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1932)
Kelling v. Brooks
275 P. 1077 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1929)
Huey v. Starr
101 P. 1075 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1909)