Kendrick

Kendrick v. Diamond Creek Consolidated Gold Mining Co.

Good Law
1892 Cal. LEXIS 654·94 Cal. 137·29 P. 324
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 29, 1892No. 14479California440 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

This appeal is from an order of the court below refusing to change the place of trial of the cause from Nevada County to the city and county of San Francisco.

It appears from the complaint that the Diamond Creek Consolidated Gold Mining Company is an association of numerous persons joined together for the purpose of opening, developing, and working gold mines in the county of Nevada, state of California; that the injury complained of was inflicted in Nevada County, and was occasioned by their neglect in that county, while engaged in their business there. After demurrer filed to the complaint, the court below refused to change the place of trial, on the ground “ that the defendants are shown by the complaint to be an association, and engaged in business as such in the county of Nevada, where the alleged cause of action accrued, and, as appears by the complaint herein, the alleged injury was inflicted, and that as such association they were, under section 16 of article XII. of the constitution of the state of California, *138 liable to be sued in the county of Nevada, where the cause of action accrued.

The only argument made against this ruling seems to be that the complaint does…

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.