From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Imperial Land Company v. Imperial Irrigation District

Supreme Court of California,In Bank
Dec 8, 1913
166 Cal. 491 (Cal. 1913)

Summary

In Imperial Land Co. v. Imperial Irrigation District, 166 Cal. 491, [ 137 P. 234], this court suggested two methods whereby a qualified judge may be secured to preside at a trial in a county in which the only resident judge of the superior court is disqualified — one by calling a judge to hold an extra session; another by securing from the governor a designation of an unbiased judge from another county for the particular case.

Summary of this case from Matter of Application of Burch

Opinion

S.F. No. 6800.

December 8, 1913.

APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandate to compel the board of directors of an irrigation district to call an election upon the question of an assessment upon the property in the district.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Valentine Newby, and McCutchen, Olney Willard, for Petitioners.


This is an application in mandamus to compel the board of directors of Imperial Irrigation District to call an election upon the question of a two per cent assessment upon the property in the district, made under the provisions of section 59 of the so-called "Bridgford Act," as amended in 1911 (Stats. 1911, p. 1111). It is claimed that a petition for such election, signed by the required number of electors of the district, has been filed with the board, and that thereby an election is made mandatory, under the provisions of said section. This court is asked to hear evidence and decide as to the genuineness of the 681 signatures to the election petition, a question which will necessarily require much more time than we have at our disposal for such matters. The cases which must be decided by this court because no other court has jurisdiction are so numerous that we are unable to take up original proceedings of which there is concurrent jurisdiction, where it is possible to present them to some other competent court. The fact that the judge of the superior court of Imperial County is disqualified to act upon this particular assessment does not oust that court of jurisdiction. It is easily possible by calling in a judge to hold an extra session, or by securing from the governor a designation of some other judge to sit in that county for this case, to obtain a trial there by a qualified judge. The interested parties may by this means pursue in that court any remedy they may have, whether by mandamus or other form of proceeding or action.

For these reasons the application is dismissed, without prejudice to an application or action in any other court.


Summaries of

Imperial Land Company v. Imperial Irrigation District

Supreme Court of California,In Bank
Dec 8, 1913
166 Cal. 491 (Cal. 1913)

In Imperial Land Co. v. Imperial Irrigation District, 166 Cal. 491, [ 137 P. 234], this court suggested two methods whereby a qualified judge may be secured to preside at a trial in a county in which the only resident judge of the superior court is disqualified — one by calling a judge to hold an extra session; another by securing from the governor a designation of an unbiased judge from another county for the particular case.

Summary of this case from Matter of Application of Burch
Case details for

Imperial Land Company v. Imperial Irrigation District

Case Details

Full title:IMPERIAL LAND COMPANY (a Corporation), et al., Petitioners, v. IMPERIAL…

Court:Supreme Court of California,In Bank

Date published: Dec 8, 1913

Citations

166 Cal. 491 (Cal. 1913)
137 P. 234

Citing Cases

Yolo Water Etc. Co. v. Superior Court

' "In Imperial Land Co. v. Imperial Irrigation District, 166 Cal. 491, [ 137 P. 234], this court suggested…

Roma Macaroni Factory v. Giambastiani

Being able to readily determine the facts they are enabled to act expeditiously without impairing the rights…