“It must be presumed that 27 16 1 plaintiff’s attorney knew of the charter provision that a claim was deemed rejected after 90 days, 2 and knew that authority to approve or reject the claim was vested in the city council rather than the 3 city clerk, who could merely make a recommendation.”
How later courts described this case
- “It must be presumed that 27 16 1 plaintiff’s attorney knew of the charter provision that a claim was deemed rejected after 90 days, 2 and knew that authority to approve or reject the claim was vested in the city council rather than the 3 city clerk, who could merely make a recommendation.”
- counsel is presumed to know the statute of limitations for filing claims
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
McCOMB, J.
I dissent. I would affirm the judgment for the reasons expressed by Mr. Justice Pourt in the opinion prepared by him for the District Court of Appeal (Cal.App.), 343 P.2d 130 .
Schauer, J., concurred.