Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)

Citation: Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)
Parent Document: Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 550 P.2d 1001 (1976)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1976-06-16
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1193965/birkenfeld-v-city-of-berkeley/ ↗

Full Text

1,087 chars

Cal.2d 661, damages for personal injuries resulting from a fall on a broken sidewalk were recovered from the defendant city by a plaintiff who had filed a timely claim in full compliance with the applicable state statute prior to commencing the suit. The city contended that the claim was insufficient as filed because it did not include the more detailed information prescribed by the city charter, arguing “that its charter provision as to itemization of damages is merely supplementary to the general law—an additional, not a contrary requirement—and therefore is valid.” (29 Cal.2d at p. 666.) We held that the statute had occupied the field of filing such claims ¿gainst municipalities and that the city could not impose more onerous conditions with respect to the required contents of a claim. We rejected the city’s contention that its auditing procedures required more detailed information, pointing out that the statute was intended to provide completely for the city’s needs for information about claims in advance of suit. (29 Cal.2d at p. 667.) Similarly in Wilson v. Beville

Other Sections in This Document (374)

Full Text