Legal Opinion

Merced Falls Gas & Electric Co. v. Turner

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 24, 1906No. Civ. No. 158PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcLAUGHLIN, J.

Action for an injunction restraining the hoard of trustees and superintendent of the streets of the city of Merced from changing the position of certain electric light poles on M street in said city. The city has never owned or controlled public works for supplying artificial light, and for ten years prior to the commencement of this action, the appellant corporation had been, and then was, furnishing the city and its inhabitants with electric light, and in so doing had maintained nine electric light poles, at as many different corners on the street mentioned, by permission of the city…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. City of Oakland v. Oakland Water Front Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
  2. American Rapid Telegraph Co. v. HessNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  3. De Baker v. Southern California RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Ex parte FiskeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  5. Vanderhurst v. TholckeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State of California v. Marin Municipal Water Dist.California Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Martin v. DanzigerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
  3. Southern California Gas Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Southern California Gas Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API