From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

County of Sierra v. Flanigan

Supreme Court of California,In Bank
Oct 1, 1906
149 Cal. 769 (Cal. 1906)

Opinion

Sac. No. 1305.

October 1, 1906.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sierra County. Stanley A. Smith, Judge.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Campbell, Metson Campbell, W.H. Metson, A.E. Cheney, and Thomas H. Breeze, for Appellant.

Frank R. Wehe, Solinsky Wehe, and W.I. Redding, for Respondent.


This case was argued and submitted with County of Plumas v. Wheeler, just decided, ante, p. 758, [ 87 P. 909], and involves the validity of an ordinance of Sierra County, substantially similar to the ordinance of Plumas County, considered in the Wheeler case. Here a general demurrer to the county's complaint setting forth the ordinance and seeking to recover license fees under it, was overruled, with leave to the defendant to answer. Upon his default for failure to answer within the time allowed, plaintiff had judgment according to the prayer of its complaint. Defendant appeals.

For the reasons stated in County of Plumas v. Wheeler, ante, p. 758, the complaint stated a cause of action, and the demurrer was properly overruled.

The judgment is affirmed.

Shaw, J., Angellotti, J., and Beatty, C.J., concurred.

Rehearing denied.


Summaries of

County of Sierra v. Flanigan

Supreme Court of California,In Bank
Oct 1, 1906
149 Cal. 769 (Cal. 1906)
Case details for

County of Sierra v. Flanigan

Case Details

Full title:COUNTY OF SIERRA, Respondent, v. P.L. FLANIGAN, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of California,In Bank

Date published: Oct 1, 1906

Citations

149 Cal. 769 (Cal. 1906)
87 P. 913

Citing Cases

County of Mono v. Depauli

In the court below, as stated by appellant, the ordinance was attacked on various grounds, to wit, that the…

Wheeler v. Ridenour

(See, also, on both the above points, the case of County of Sierra v. Flanigan, ante, p. 770, [ 87 P. 801],…