Escondido Mut. Water Co. v. City of Escondido
Before: Henshaw
Synopsis
Mutual Water Company—Municipality as Stockholder—Limitations on Bight to Supply op Water—Company Not a Public Service Corporation.—A mutual water company, organized to distribute the water which it controlled to its stockholders at cost and ratably in the proportion which their shares of stock bore to the total issued stock of the company, is not charged with the public duty of supplying to a municipal corporation that was one of its stockholders water in excess of the proportionate amount to which it was entitled as a stockholder, on the theory that the company having undertaken to furnish water for municipal purposes, was obligated to continue to do so in accordance with the needs of the municipality up to the capacity of the company’s ability to supply water, if the only water that the company ever voluntarily furnished the municipality was the proportionate share to which it was entitled as such stockholders, and all excess of water which it received was taken by it from the company by force and against the company’s protest.
Id.—Successor to Franchises and Assets op Dissolved Irrigation District.—Such mutual water company, by becoming the successor in interest of the franchises and physical assets of a prior irrigation district upon its dissolution, does not become obligated to furnish water for municipal purposes to such city situated within the limits of the former irrigation district, if the latter was at no time engaged in the diversion, collection, storing, and distribution of water as a public service corporation, and only stored and distributed water to the inhabitants and landowners of the district in accordance with the law governing the use of waters controlled by such irrigation district.
Id.—Determination op Public Use in Waters.—A public use in waters may cease and determine, and this may be accomplished by consent of all parties in interest, or by operation of law.
Id.—Public Use in Waters—Bight to Continued Use—Abandonment op Use.—It is only the use of water appropriated for sale, rental, or distribution which is a public use under section 1 of article XIV of the constitution, and while it is true that when any water has been so devoted to a public use, the public, and each individual member thereof as a part of the public, has a right to the continued use of that water, so that the use may not be changed to the injury of those entitled to rely upon its continuance, and, if abandoned by the purveyors of the use, may be taken over to the end that the use may be continued, it by no means follows, that the public use impressed upon any particular water supply may not .be abandoned.
Id.—Acquisition op Stock by Municipality—Ultra Vires.—If the acquisition by the municipality of the stock in such mutual water company was ultra vires and void, the water company would be under no legal compulsion to supply the municipality with any water whatsoever.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)