The record-union., 1896-11-21
AN INTERESTING DECISION.
Demurrer Against Mrs. Hensley'S Com
plant Sustained.
Judge Catlin Decides That Reclama-
tion Districts Cannot
be Sued,

LII TIE AoHlH OIL OctODer, 1854, Recla-
nation District No. $50, containing the
lands of the upper part of Andrus
Island, commenced to construct a ditch
which was part Of the districts recla-
nation works.
Like all works of this character, it
was late in the fall before the ditch
was completed, and much of the land
was not drained.
The land owners as soon as it was
evident that district was a reality
planted to crops all the land that it
was possible to get under cultivation.
And when the sipage water, with the
raise of the river. percolated through
the levee, these crops, owing to the fact
that the ditch was not completed, were
drowned out.
Now, Mrs. Mary A, Henslev lost
through the water standing on her
land, lot of peach, pear and plum
trees, an acre of beets, half an acre of
carrots, two acres of green peas. and
two acres of potatoes, and on the 10Th
day OF September she commenced an
action against the Reclamation Dis
trict through her attorneys, Stearns &
Elliott of San Francisco, for damages,
PidSiiS uci IOSS at SO,UIl
The defendant, Reclamation District
No. oo6, by its attorney, W. A. Gett,
Jr., fnterposed a demurrer that the
complaint did not state facts sufficient
to constitute cause of action, claim
ing that the district was a quasi mu-
nicipal corporation and exercised only
those privileges given it by statute;
and that was, to expend all the funds
raised by it, to defray the expenses of
reclaiming the land of the particular
district, within which the assessment
was raised. Citing in support of his
position Dillon on Municipal Corpora
tions, Section 961; Cooley's Constitu-
tional Limitations, Sections 25O-257;
and Elmore vs. Drainage Commission
ers, 13o Illinois 269. This last case is
the leading American case on the La
bility OF quasi-municipal corporations,
being cited by the editors of the Amer
lean and English corporation cases and
the editor of the American State Re-
ports.
Judge Catlin in deciding the demurrer
yesterday, said: THE action is to re-
cover damages alleged to have been
| sustained by plaintiff by reason Of the
the course of construction of reclama
ton works. whereby the plaintiff was
prevented from draining her lands of
water, which injured her fruit trees,
fruit and other crops
"A demurrer is interposed upon the
ground that the complaint does not
state a cause of action.
THE defendant is, for certain pur-
poses, a corporation, that is to say. a
quasi-municipal corporation. 1t is
created under the authority Of the Po-
litical Code, Sections SAG to 1892. 1t
Is far short of being such a corporation
as county or city-which may sue and
be sued. There is no provision Of the
statute authorizing it to be sued for
| any purpose; nor Is there any
authorizing it to sue, except for
the specific purpose of collecting de-
| lnquent assessments, and perhaps
also, to institute and carry on proceed
1ngs to condemn land for the right of
way, and the right to take material for
the construction Of reclamation works.
In the absence Of a statute subject
ing Swamp Land Reclamation Districts
to actions for damages suffered through
the negligence Of their officers, such
actions cannot be maintained. 1 think
the law in this State has been long
settled to that effect
Let the demurrer be sustained, with
out leave to amend, as it is apparent
that cause of action against the de-
fendant cannot be stated for the in
jury complained off,
Was the law such that this class of
corporations could be sued, the inevita-
bic result would be to waste the funds
OF the district in litigation in nearly all
cases with parties who were trying to
defeat reclamation in place Of digging
bitches and building levees