Case Name: ALBERT ESAISA, etc., v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SONOMA COUNTY et al., Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1929-07-31
Citations: 207 Cal. 796
Docket Number: S. F. No. 13283
Parties: ALBERT ESAISA, etc., v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SONOMA COUNTY et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Reports
Volume: 207
Pages: 796–797

Head Matter:
[S. F. No. 13283.
In Bank.
July 31, 1929.]
ALBERT ESAISA, etc., v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SONOMA COUNTY et al., Respondents.
Casper A. Ornbaum, Charles A. Strong, Hale McCowen, Jr., Charles N. Mannon and Edward S. Bell for Petitioner.
George H. Harlan, U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, and Robert W. Harrison, Chief Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondents.
John J. O'Toole, Hart H. North and Edson Abel, Amici Curiae.

Opinion:
THE COURT.
This matter comes to us upon a petition for a writ of review to determine the legality of the findings and judgment and other proceedings leading up to the formation of the proposed Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, which matter has been .determined by the defendant Superior Court contrary to the contentions of petitioner. The questions raised have all been disposed of in a case from the county of Napa, California, involving precisely the same legal situation, which case has been this day decided by this court. (Wheatley v. Superior Court et al. [S. F. No. 13281 of the records of this court], ante, p. 722 [279 Pac. 989].)
For the reasons stated in the case last cited, the proceedings are affirmed.