Leeman

Leeman v. Perris Irrigation District

Good Law
140 Cal. 540·1903 Cal. LEXIS 633·74 P. 24
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 9, 1903L.A. No. 1366.California1,753 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

This is an action to recover the amount of certain so-called “installment coupons,” attached to certain bonds of defendant, a corporation organized under the commonly called Wright Act (Stats. 1887, p. 29). The trial court gave judgment for defendant upon the ground that the bonds to which these coupons were attached were disposed of “in a manner and for a purpose unauthorized by law, and that said bonds are, and each of them is, absolutely void.” Plaintiff appeals from the judgment and from the order denying his motion for a new trial. The bonds in question are numbered 192, 623, and 656, and are part of a series aggregating $442,000, signed and ready for issue January 1, 1891.

Bond No. 192 was one of a large number delivered to the Bear Valley Irrigation District under a certain contract in exchange for certain so-called class B acre water-right certificates, under circumstances similar to a like exchange in the case of Stimson v. Alessandro Irrigation Dist., 135 Cal. 389 . Plaintiff had notice of all the facts relating to the exchange of this bond. On the authority of the case just cited, this bond was void in plaintiff’s hands. Bonds Nos. 623 and 656 were, among many others,…

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.