Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

JOHN BOYLE, Respondent, v. C. M. HITCHCOCK, Appellant

         OPINION

         THE COURT

         We are of opinion that the objection to the assessment in this case, that it included an amount, as incidental expenses, for engineering and printing, was waived by a failure to appeal to the board of supervisors. (§ 12 of the act of 1872; Stats. 1871-2, p. 815.)

         We are also of the opinion that the resolution [4 P. 1144] of intention sufficiently described the work which the board of supervisors desired to have done.

         Judgment and order denying a new trial affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Boyle v. Hitchcock
(Nov 24, 1884)