City of San Francisco v. Spring Valley Water Works
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. On the 15th day of June, 1857, a corporation, called the San Francisco Water Works, was formed, under an Act entitled “an Act to provide for the formation of corporations for certain purposes,” passed April 14, 1853, as amended by an Act, approved April 30, 1855. This corporation introduced pure, fresh water into the City and County of San Francisco, in the year 1858- On the 23d of…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. On the 15th day of June, 1857, a corporation, called the San Francisco Water Works, was formed, under an Act entitled “an Act to provide for the formation of corporations for certain purposes,” passed April 14, 1853, as amended by an Act, approved April 30, 1855. This corporation introduced pure, fresh water into the City and County of San Francisco, in the year 1858- On the 23d of April, 1858, the Legislature passed the following Act: “An Act to authorize George H. Ensign and others, owners of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Crockett, J.:
On the former appeal, and at the first hearing of the present appeal, it was assumed, by both Court and counsel, that the rights and obligations of the defendant were to be ascertained by reference to the Act of April 23d, 1858, authorizing Ensign and his associates to lay down water-pipes in the streets of Ban Francisco. But on the rehearing the point is made for the first time by the defendant that the Ensign act is unconstitutional and void, and consequently can confer no rights on the plaintiff nor impose any duties on the defendant. The eighth section of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Spring Valley Water Works v. San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Ex parte PritzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
- Town of McGregor v. BayliesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
- California State Telegraph Co. v. Alta Telegraph Co.California Supreme Court · 1863
- Low v. Mayor & Common Council of MarysvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Los Angeles v. Los Angeles City Water Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Cook v. Port of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- City of Indianapolis v. NavinIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
- Strosser v. City of Fort WayneIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Ho Ah Kow v. NunanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of California · 1879
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.