Corporations
CITY OF LOS ANGELES (a Municipal Corporation), Appellant, v. SADIE D. GRIFFITH ABBOTT et al., Defendants; ALICE VIRGINIA HATFIELD, Respondent
129 Cal. App. 787·District Court of Appeal of the State of California·1933·CA
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
[Civ. No. 7293.
Second Appellate District, Division Two.
February 3, 1933.]
CITY OF LOS ANGELES (a Municipal Corporation), Appellant, v. SADIE D. GRIFFITH ABBOTT et al., Defendants; ALICE VIRGINIA HATFIELD, Respondent.
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.
E. C. Pyle, Hill, Morgan & Bledsoe, Meserve, Mumper, Hughes & Robertson, J. Wiseman MacDonald, Aubrey Devine and Hyams & Himrod for Respondent.
Overton, Lyman & Plumb, as Amici Curiae on Behalf of Respondent.
[MAJORITY — CRAIG, J.]
CRAIG, J.
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.
Said judgment awarding attorney’s fees is reversed. Upon the authority of City of Los Angeles v. Abbott, 217 Cal. 184 [17 Pac. (2d) 993], the judgment of dismissal is 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.