Legal Opinion

Swanson v. Marin Municipal Water District

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 25, 1976No. Civ. 36316PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ROUSE, J.-

Defendant Mann Municipal Water District (hereafter “District”) appeals from a judgment granting plaintiff Albert Swanson a peremptory writ of mandate compelling District to grant plaintiff a pipeline extension and to provide water service to his real property.

For reasons set forth herein, we conclude that District did not act either fraudulently, arbitrarily or capriciously in enacting a moratorium on new water service connections. Thus we are compelled to reverse the judgment of the trial court.

The facts upon which the case was submitted to the trial court for decision…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn.California Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Pitts v. PerlussCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Wilson v. Hidden Valley Municipal Water DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  4. City of San Jose v. DonohueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  5. Butte Co. W. U. Assn. v. Railroad Com.California Supreme Court · 1921

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Brydon v. East Bay Municipal Utility DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  2. Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association, Trustee, and Robecor, Inc. v. Summerland County Water District and Does I Through XvCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
  3. Carlton Santee Corp. v. Padre Dam Municipal Water DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  4. Lockary v. KayfetzDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1984
  5. Gilbert v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API