Alameda Conservation Assn. v. City of Alameda

California Court of Appeal Jul 24, 1968 No. Civ. 24287Published

Before: Draper

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that state-granted deeds under the acts of 1868 and 1870 conveyed tidelands to private owners in fee simple, free of any public trust, thereby rendering a subsequent 1913 legislative grant inapplicable to those lands.

Issues

Whether the 1913 legislative grant of tidelands to the City of Alameda restricted title to lands previously conveyed to private owners under 1868 and 1870 acts.
Whether the 1871 deeds were validly executed and delivered under the 1868 and 1870 acts.
Whether the trial judge was disqualified due to his status as a judge of the county where the land is situated.
Whether the plaintiff waived its right to disqualify the trial judge by failing to raise the objection at the earliest practicable opportunity.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Conveyance of like lands under the acts of 1868 and 1870 does in fact so terminate the trust and pass unrestricted title to the grantee”

“It follows that the 1871 deeds of the lands here involved transferred them to private ownership free of trust, and left no title to be granted or restricted by the act of 1913.”

“The delay until well after this date thus constitutes a waiver of the disqualification”

DRAPER, P. J.

Plaintiff sought to enjoin alleged dredging and filling of tidelands. Defendants are the City of Alameda, the board of trustees of Bay Farm Island Reclamation District No. 2105, Shore Line Properties, Inc., and the State of California. Plaintiff alleged that the lands in issue were granted to defendant city by a 1913 act of the California Legislature (Stats. 1913, ch. 348, p. 707, as amended by Stats. 1917, ch. 594, p. 709). This act specifically conveys the lands in trust, limiting their use to furtherance of commerce and navigation. If these lands were so conveyed, there could well be a question of fact, determinable in this proceeding, whether their present or proposed use is within the limited trust purpose. Defendants, however, asserted that all lands included in this action in fact were acquired almost a century ago, by private owners, through deeds from the state under authorization of acts of 1868 (Stats. 1867-1868, ch. 543, p. 716) and

[287]

1870 (Stats. 1869-1870, eh. 388, p. 541), and that the corporate defendant’s title derives from those grantees. On this basis, they moved for summary judgment, which was granted. Plaintiff appeals.

No citation of authority is required to establish that reservations of a 1913 grant could not limit title transferred in fee and without restriction many years earlier.

• But this does not dispose of the issue. Although a state owns the lands underlying its bays

(People

California Fish Co.,

166 Cal. 576, 584 [138 P. 79]), see

United States

California,

332 U. S. 19, 30 [91 L.Ed. 1889, 1894, 67 S.Ct. 1658]), it holds them in trust for the public for purposes of navigation and commerce

(People

California Fish Co., supra).

Alameda Conservation Assn. v. City of Alameda

AI Brief

DRAPER, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief