Williams v. City of Piedmont

281 P. 79, 100 Cal. App. 802, 1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 393
California Court of Appeal·Decided September 24, 1929·No. Civ. No. 6848·Published

Opinion

STURTEVANT, J.

From each of three declaratory judgments the defendant has áppealed. In each case the point is made that the trial court had no jurisdiction to determine the validity of Ordinance No. 268 of the City of Piedmont. On the authority of Andrews v. City of Piedmont (No. 6624), ante, p. 700 [281 Pac. 78], this day filed, the point may not be sustained. In the view we take of the record it is unnecessary to discuss either of the other two points made by the defendant.

Each of the judgments is affirmed.

Koford, P. J., and Nourse, J., concurred.

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

Williams v. City of Piedmont, 281 P. 79, 100 Cal. App. 802, 1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 393 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929).

281 P. 79 (Williams v. City of Piedmont) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Andrews v. City of Piedmont
281 P. 78 (California Court of Appeal, 1929)