Case ID: cal_2/html/0133-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Justice Murray", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WILLIAM S. WEBB, Respondent, v. GEORGE N. HANSON, Appellant.
    No appeal lies from the judgment of a District Court, on an appeal from an order of the Court of Sessions, upon an application of a ferry license.
    Appeal from the Tenth Judicial District, Yuba County.
    Webb petitioned the Court of Sessions of Yuba County for a ferry license across Feather River, near Yuba City, stating that he was “the owner, or” had a possessory right to the land on both sides; and that he had given the notices required. The Court granted the petition, authorizing the applicant to collect specified tolls; from which order the appellant and one Bayless appealed to the District Court, and filed a written opposition, denying the petition, and stating that they each held a several license to run a ferry within one mile of the place where Webb sought to have a ferry. The cause was tried by a jury in the District Court, and evidence given on both sides, as to the utility of the proposed ferry, &c. A motion by the appellants for a nonsuit, was denied; and several instructions asked by them were refused. The jury found that the proposed ferry was required by the public convenience; that the land where it was sought to be established, was public land; that the applicant was a suitable person to keep a ferry; and that notices of his application had been set up in three of the most public places of the township, thirty days before the order of the Court of Sessions. The Court overruled a motion by the appellants for a new trial; and affirmed the order of the Court of Sessions. Hanson appealed to this Court.
    
      Wm. Wallcer, for the- appellant.
    1st. As this case involves the legality of tolls, an appeal lies to this Court. 2nd. The respondent did not show a compliance with the law regulating the granting of ferry licenses.
    
      JP. A. Morse, for the respondent.
    1st. This Court has no jurisdiction of the cause. No appeal is given in a case like the present. 2nd. The judgment is right.
   Justice Murray

delivered the opinion of the Court. This is

an appeal from a judgment, affirming an order of the Court of Sessions of Yuba county, granting the respondent a right of ferry. Cognisance of these matters is given by law to the Court of. Sessions; and their action may be reviewed by the District Court. No appeal is provided, in such cases, from the judgment of the District Court. The record does not show that the judgment was rendered in a suit for a tax, toll, impost, or municipal fine;” nor that the amount exceeds $200. So that, there being no statutory provision for an appeal, and the case not falling within the constitutional provision, this Court has no jurisdiction over the matter.

The appeal is dismissed.

The appellant filed a petition for a rehearing. The petition was overruled at the ensuing term.