Case ID: cal_197/html/0795-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "THE COURT.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[Sac. No. 3671.
    In Bank.
    September 30, 1925.]
    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DIVISION OF WATER RIGHTS, et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COUNTY OF SISKIYOU et al., Respondents.
    
      CU Water Commission Act — Time of Application of Appropriated Water — Issuance of Certificate — Writ of Review — Jurisdiction—Parties.—On this application for a writ of prohibition to restrain the superior court of Siskiyou County from taking any further action in a proceeding for a writ of review to review the action of the Division of Water Rights of the Department of Public Works of the State of California from issuing a certificate under section 12 of the Water Commission Act, the writ is ordered issued upon the authority of the case of the “Department of Public Works of the State of California Division of Water Bights et al., Petitioners, v. The Superior Court of Siskiyou County et al., Bespondents,’’ ante, p. 215.
    APPLICATION for a Writ of Prohibition to restrain the Superior Court of Siskiyou County from proceeding with a hearing of a petition for a writ of review. Walter E. Her-zinger, Judge. Writ granted.
    The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
    Spencer Burroughs, for Petitioners.
    Robert D. Duke, C. F. Holland and Chas. L. Gilmore for Respondents.
   THE COURT.

This is an application for a writ of prohibition to restrain the respondents from taking any further action in a proceeding for a writ of review pending in the respondent court. The questions involved herein are the same as those considered and disposed of in the case of Department of Public Works et al. v. Superior Court, ante, p. 215 [239 Pac. 1076], except that in this proceeding the State Board of Fish and Game Commissioners is the applicant for a writ of review in the Superior Court. Because of our determination that the petitioners herein do not exercise a judicial function in acting on an application under section 12 of the Water Commission Act (Stats. 1913, p. 1018), it is unnecessary to determine whether or riot the State Board of Fish and Game Commissioners is a party beneficially interested in the certiorari proceedings in the Superior Court.

On the authority of the case above referred to and this day decided the demurrer is overruled. Let the peremptory writ of prohibition issue.