Case Name: CALIFORNIA MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY, Respondent, v. CHESTER A. SMITH, Marshal and Ex-officio Tax Collector, etc., et al., Defendants; WALDO S. JOHNSON, Appellant; JOHN MARTIN, Respondent, v. CHESTER A. SMITH, Marshal and Ex-officio Tax Collector, etc., et al., Defendants; WALDO S. JOHNSON, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1918-09-05
Citations: 178 Cal. 812
Docket Number: Sac. No. 2575; Sac. No. 2576
Parties: CALIFORNIA MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY, Respondent, v. CHESTER A. SMITH, Marshal and Ex-officio Tax Collector, etc., et al., Defendants; WALDO S. JOHNSON, Appellant. JOHN MARTIN, Respondent, v. CHESTER A. SMITH, Marshal and Ex-officio Tax Collector, etc., et al., Defendants; WALDO S. JOHNSON, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Reports
Volume: 178
Pages: 812–813

Head Matter:
[Sac. No. 2575.
Department Two.
September 5, 1918.]
CALIFORNIA MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANY, Respondent, v. CHESTER A. SMITH, Marshal and Ex-officio Tax Collector, etc., et al., Defendants; WALDO S. JOHNSON, Appellant. JOHN MARTIN, Respondent, v. CHESTER A. SMITH, Marshal and Ex-officio Tax Collector, etc., et al., Defendants; WALDO S. JOHNSON, Appellant.
[Sac. No. 2576.
Department Two.—
September 5, 1918.]
Taxation—Premature Sale.—Judgment and orders denying motions for a new trial affirmed on the authority of Marysville Woolen Mills v. Smith, ante, p. 786.
APPEALS from a judgment of the Superior Court of Yuba County, and orders denying motions for a new trial. Eugene P. McDaniel, Judge.
The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion in Marysville Woolen Mills v. Smith, ante, p. 786.
Downey, Pullen & Downey, and W. E. Davies, for Appellant.
W. H. Carlin, for Respondent.

Opinion:
THE COURT.
By stipulation of the parties in the above two causes, it is agreed that the decision in the case of Marysville Woolen Mills v. Smith, ante, p. 786, [175 Pac. 13], shall govern and control the disposition of said two appeals, and the judgment and order of the trial court in said latter case having this day been affirmed, it is hereby ordered that the judgment and the orders denying motions for a new trial, given and made by the trial court in each of the above-entitled actions, be and the same are hereby affirmed.