Walker v. Shasta Power Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California. The defendant in error, a corporation organized under a general corporation act, assumed in its articles the following, among other powers: “To sell, furnish and deal in electric light, heat and power, and to dispose of such portions thereof, as may not be used by the corporation, to cities, towns, villages, public and private corporations, political subdivisions and individuals; to…
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California. The defendant in error, a corporation organized under a general corporation act, assumed in its articles the following, among other powers: “To sell, furnish and deal in electric light, heat and power, and to dispose of such portions thereof, as may not be used by the corporation, to cities, towns, villages, public and private corporations, political subdivisions and individuals; to locate, claim, divert, and otherwise acquire water and water rights under the laws of the state of California, and under…
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The question first to be determined is whether the use for which condemnation is sought is a public use. Section 1238 of the Code of Civil Procedure of California makes provision for the exercise of the right of eminent domain in behalf of public uses, and enumerates among other public uses the following:
“Gauals, reservoirs, dams, ditches, flumes, aqueducts and pipes for supplying and storing water for the operation of machinery for the purpose of generating and transmitting electricity for the supply of mines, quarries, railroads, tramways, mills and…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- In re the Bonds of the Madera Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Attorney General v. City of Eau ClaireWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- In Re Niagara Falls & Whirlpool Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1888
- County of San Mateo v. CoburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Bowker v. BakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- North Carolina Public Service Co. v. Southern Power Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1922
- University of Southern California v. RobbinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Alabama Interstate Power Co. v. Mt. Vernon-Woodberry Cotton Duck Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1913
- Smouse v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1929
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.