County of Los Angeles v. Rindge Company
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Respondent, v. RINDGE COMPANY (A Corporation), Et Al., Appellants
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
SHAW, J.
In a proceeding against defendants for the condemnation of a strip of land for use as a highway, the plaintiff had an interlocutory judgment, followed by a final order and judgment condemning the property. Thereafter, under and in accordance with the provisions of section 1254 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court made an order under and by virtue of which plaintiff was authorized to take immediate possession and use of the property, from which order defendants have appealed.
In the case of Adamson v. County of Los Angeles, 52 Cal. App. 125 , [ 198 Pac. 52 ], the plaintiff therein, alleging the order was void, sought to have the county enjoined from the prosecution of work in the construction of the road. From an adverse judgment rendered by the superior court, Adamson appealed. The court of appeal held the order was valid and that no ground existed for the attack made thereon. The determination of the court there had *797 must be deemed decisive of the question. Upon the authority of that case and what is said by this court in County of Los Angeles v. Rindge Co. et al., ante, p. 166, [ 200 Pac. 27 ], the order appealed from is affirmed.
Conrey, P. J., and James, J., concurred.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.