Los Angeles herald., 1891-01-01
THE CITY'S LAW SUITS.
The Present Status of Municipal
Litigation.
A Fall List OF all Suits in Which the
City Is Interested, and Their Status
for the Year Past.

terested,wit the condition of the cases,
is shown by the following taken from
the city attorneys report for the year
up to December 9th:
The following is list of the cases, to-
gether with brief statement OF the dis
position that has been made of them or
their present status:
III. w. latham VS.. city of Los Angeles
and L. M. Bigelow-This is an action
affecting the title to the land upon
which the Plaza engine house stands.
Judgment was rendered against the city
in 1888; an appeal was taken to the SUI
preme court, and this appeal was sub
mitted on briefs at the October term oi
the supreme court, and decision may
be expected any time.
City vs. Cromwell Galpin, ct al.-This
action has been tried and Judgment
rendered against the defendant Clemans,
awarding the city the piece of property
in the intersection Of Ward and Fig
ueroa streets. Clemans is taking steps
to appeal the action.
H. S. Parcels vs. City of Los Angeles
This action was brought to recover
$5050 alleged to be due Mr.. Parcels as
AWE iAV ONeAAS VdA COllCCIOIs AC
case has been tried in the superior court
and judgment rendered in favor of the
city. An appeal has been taken and is
now pending in the supreme court.
l.: H. Blgelow vs. City of Los Angeles,
ct al.-This was an action brought to en-
join the building of the First-street via
duct. The injunction was denied in the
superior court, and upon an appeal
taken to the supreme court the judg-
ment OF the lower court, denying an in
junction to Mrs. Bigelow, was sustained.
II. W. Mills vs.. City OF Los Angeles
This action was brought to determine
plaintiffs right to sixteen feet of land
lying in Second street between Main and
Spring. The city won the case in the
superior court, and Mills has appealed,
and the case is now pending in the su-
preme court.
City of Los Angeles vs. Francois
Douillard ct al.-1s an action brought
to open Mozart street, the defendant
having closed the street, and claiming
the land therein. Judgment was rem
dered in favor Of the city as to that part
Of the land claimed by Douillard.
Main Street and Agricultural Park
Railroad vs.. Morford--TTth;s action was
brought to enjoin the removal of part
Of plaintiffs buildings, which are
claimed to be in the line OF Washing
ton street. This action Is at issue, and
will be tried in the coming year.
French Benevolent Society We. City
This action is brought to enjoin the
grading of Yale street, on the ground
that protest OF majority of the prop
erty owners had been filed. This case is
still pending.
Louis Phillips ct al. VS.. Len ]. .Thomp-
son and the City.-An action brought
by the plaintiff and fifty-five others to
prevent the collection OF certain taxes,
on the ground that the action of the
board of equalization was illegal and
void. This case was decided against the
city, and a motion for a new trial is now
pending.
Mary A. Mooney vs. City of Los An
geies-This action was brought to quiet
title to piece of land on the corner of
Main and Jefferson streets, which has
been taken by the city for street pur-
poses, and which plaintiff claims be-
longs to her. This case is at issue, and
will be set for trial at the January term
of court.
Mary A. Mooney vs.. w. E. Morford
and the Mayor and Council-This action
is brought to recover damages in the
amount of $23 400, alleged to be due for
cutting down certain trees upon the
land at the corner of Main and Jefferson
streets, and which land the city claims
is part OF Jefferson street. This case
is at issue, and will be set for trial at
the next term of court.
Frick Bros. VS.. Morford-This action
was brought to compel the street super
intendent to make new assessment for
the grading of Seventh street. Judg-
ment was rendered in favor of Colonel
Morford in the superior court, and was
sub bmitted at the last term of court.
The following cases have been brought
since the date of my last annual report :
j. M. Dayies vs.. City of Los Angeles
This action was brought to enjoin the
sale of certain lots for the assessment
made by the commissioners for widen
ing and opening Davies street. A de-
murrer was sustained to the complaint,
and plaintiff has never amended.
Depot Railway company We. City-A
similar suit, and brought to enjoin the
sale of certain property to pay assesses
ment made for the opening of Davie-
street. Action still pending.
Katie Wells VS.. w. E. Morford ct al
An action brought to enjoin the street
superintendent from removing bridge
from street to sidewalk, used for carriage
drive. A permanent injunction was
granted the plaintiff.
M. M. Bovard ct al. vs.. w. +. Nor
ford-This suit was brought to enjoin
the collection of assessment for opening
Sixth street east. The injunction has
been dissolved and the street superin-
tendent ordered to proceed.
Elizabeth j. Guirardo vs. w. E. Nor
ford.-This action is similar to the last
one above. Has been won by the city,
and street superintendent instructed to
proceed.
j. F. Smith vs. Morford. Same con-
dition as the last-named case.
Charles Gassen vs. Morford.-S
condition as last case.
Antonio Valla vs. City of Los Angeles
andW. f. Morford.- This suit is brought
to enjoin the selling Of plaintiffs g prop
crty to pay assessment for widening First
street. This case is awaiting the result
Of proposed compromise between plain
tiff and other property-owners on the
street.
Alice Dehail ct al. vs.. City of Los An
geles-This suit was brought for the
same purpose as the last one. The case
is at issue, and will be set for trial at
the next term of court.
H..