California State Telegraph Co. v. Alta Telegraph Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Twelfth Judicial District. The facts are stated in the opinion. The only portions of the Act of May 3d, 1852, material to the decision, are the first and second sections, as follows: “ Sec. 1. The right and privilege is hereby granted to Oliver E. Allen and Clark Burnham, or them assigns, to construct and put in operation an electro-magnetic telegraph line from the City of San Francisco to the City of Marysville, by the way of the cities of San José,…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Twelfth Judicial District. The facts are stated in the opinion. The only portions of the Act of May 3d, 1852, material to the decision, are the first and second sections, as follows: “ Sec. 1. The right and privilege is hereby granted to Oliver E. Allen and Clark Burnham, or them assigns, to construct and put in operation an electro-magnetic telegraph line from the City of San Francisco to the City of Marysville, by the way of the cities of San José, Stockton, and Sacramento, with the right of way over any lands belonging to this State, and on or along any streets, roads, or…
1Opinion of the CourtCrocker, J.
This is an appeal from an order dissolving a temporary injunction, which was granted and dissolved upon the complaint alone. The complaint alleges that on the first day of June, 1853, the plaintiff was duly incorporated under the general Corporation Law of this State, passed April 22d, 1850, for the purpose of constructing and operating an electro-magnetic telegraph fine from the City of San Francisco to the City of Marysville, by the way of San José, Stockton, and Sacramento; that immediately thereafter Allen & Burnham assigned to them all the rights and privileges *421granted to them by the Act…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Natoma Water & Mining Co. v. ClarkinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- City of Aurora v. WestIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
- Low v. Mayor & Common Council of MarysvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
3Cited by18 opinions
- Los Angeles v. Los Angeles City Water Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Collins v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- In Re the Estate of McGrawNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- City of San Francisco v. Spring Valley Water WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Davenport v. KleinschmidtMontana Supreme Court · 1887
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.