# Antonelle v. Board of New City Hall Commissioners

> California Supreme Court · December 11, 1891 · 92 Cal. 228

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5445648

## Case

- **Full name:** JOSEPH S. ANTONELLE v. BOARD OF NEW CITY HALL COMMISSIONERS
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** December 11, 1891
- **Citations:** 92 Cal. 228; 28 P. 270; 1891 Cal. LEXIS 1202
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by McFarland
- **Judges:** McFarland
- **Cited by:** 7 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5445648

## Opinion text

McFarland, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the superior court, in a proceeding in mandamus, commanding the board of new city hall commissioners to allow a certain demand of respondents payable out of the new city hall fund. The transcript consists merely of the pleadings, the judgment, and a notice of appeal therefrom. The case was tried without a jury, and findings were waived. The complaint (or petition) states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and to authorize the issuance of the writ prayed for, and was attacked only by a general demurrer. All the issues made by the pleadings are presumed to have been found in favor of the petitioners. We are unable, therefore, to see any opening for an attack on the judgment.
Judgment affirmed.
De Haven, J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5445648. Public record. Not legal advice.