Humboldt M. Co. v. N.W. Pac. Ry. Co.

Good Law
166 Cal. 175·1913 Cal. LEXIS 302·135 P. 503
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 13, 1913S.F. No. 6185.California3,195 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sloss, J.

The plaintiff brings this action to recover damages for the alleged breach of a written agreement entered into between W. J. Swortzel and R. R. Smith, copartners under the firm name of Swortzel & Smith, of the one part, and Eel' River & Eureka Railroad Company, a corporation, of the other part. The plaintiff claims as assignee of the rights of Swortzel & Smith under said agreement, and seeks to hold the defendant as successor in interest to the said Eel River & Eureka Railroad Company.

. The agreement in question was executed on March 27, 1901. Prior to that time, as the complaint avers, Swortzel & Smith were the owners of the shingle and shake bolt timber upon a tract of land in Humboldt County known as the Swett claim. They also owned a shingle mill at Fortuna, in said county. The Bel River & Eureka Railroad Company operated a railroad as a common carrier between Eureka and Burnell’s station in said Humboldt County. Its railroad line passed near the location of Swortzel & Smith’s mill, but did not extend to within a mile or thereabouts from the Swett claim. The agreement here involved was made for the purpose of enabling Swortzel & Smith to move shingle bolts from their said…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.