From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

City of Los Angeles v. Abbott

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two
Feb 3, 1933
129 Cal.App. 790 (Cal. Ct. App. 1933)

Opinion

Docket No. 7542.

February 3, 1933.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Myron Westover, Judge. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Erwin P. Werner, City Attorney, Frederick von Schrader, Assistant City Attorney, and Arthur Loveland, Arthur W. Nordstrom and C.N. Perkins, Deputies City Attorney, for Appellant.

J. Wiseman MacDonald, Hill, Morgan Bledsoe, Meserve, Mumper, Hughes Robertson, E.C. Pyle, Aubrey Devine and Hyams Himrod for Respondent.

Overton, Lyman Plumb, as Amici Curiae on Behalf of Respondent.


An action in eminent domain having been discontinued following proceedings in injunction to restrain condemnation of properties in the City of Los Angeles, a judgment of dismissal was entered, from which the plaintiff appealed.

[1] Said judgment awarding attorney's fees is reversed. Upon the authority of City of Los Angeles v. Abbott, 217 Cal. 184 [ 17 P.2d 993], the judgment of dismissal must be affirmed.

Works, P.J., and Stephens, J., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the District Court of Appeal on March 3, 1933.


Summaries of

City of Los Angeles v. Abbott

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two
Feb 3, 1933
129 Cal.App. 790 (Cal. Ct. App. 1933)
Case details for

City of Los Angeles v. Abbott

Case Details

Full title:CITY OF LOS ANGELES (a Municipal Corporation), Appellant, v. SADIE D…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two

Date published: Feb 3, 1933

Citations

129 Cal.App. 790 (Cal. Ct. App. 1933)
19 P.2d 48

Citing Cases

IBLC Abogados, S.C. v. Bracamonte

The primary issue here is whether the statute of limitations will limit Plaintiff's recovery. Under…