Pool v. Simmons
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.
The action is to condemn a strip of land for a ferry-landing, 60 x 145 feet, on the west bank of the Sacramento River, in Yolo County. Judgment went for the plaintiffs, from which and an order denying a motion for a new trial defendants appealed.
1. It is contended on the part of the appellants that the complaint fails to show that the plaintiffs were the owners and holders of a franchise: to erect and construct a ferry, and hence fails to state facts sufficient to' constitute a cause of action. This claim is based upon the fact that the complaint does not show that the franchise in question…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- City of Pasadena v. StimsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- County of San Mateo v. CoburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Inre Yick WoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Christy v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- Sharp v. DaugneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Silver v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
- Pool v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- In Re East Bay Etc. Water Bonds of 1925California Supreme Court · 1925
- City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court of Tuolumne Cty.California Supreme Court · 1921
- People v. OlsenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.