The herald., 1898-09-07

plicated situation lies in the appointment
Of some Indifferent person as a receiver
to operate both water supply and 0istrib-
uting system in conformity with the pub
lie requirements, and to collect all water
rates and charges for service connections
under the orders of the court, to be dis
rbuted as the court shall ultimately de-
termine. Counsel for the water COM
panies, however, insist that the court has
no power to appoint a receiver for the rea-
son that such an appointment would be
tantamount to the dissolution Of the cor
poration and that upon the dissolution Of
a corporation, the directors are by stat
ute made trustees with full and exclusive
power to settle the affairs Of the corpora
ton. To sustain this position counsel have
cited various authorities: but after a care
full examination Of them I am Of the opin-
ion that they do not apply to the facts
here presented, for the reason that the
creation of such a receivership as Is re-
quired here would not amount to dtsso-
luton Of either Of the water companies.
1t Is also urged that as to the Crystal
Springs Land and Water Company, a re-
ceiver ought not to be appointed for the
reason that the title to the water Of the
Crystal Springs Land and Water Company
is in dispute, and that under such circum-
stances courts are reluctant to appoint re-
ceivers. 1t Is doubtless true that In suits
for the recovery Of real property a re-
ceiver will not usually be appointed, but
II is also true that when equitable grounds
are shown emitting the plaintiff to the
rents and profits as such or when It is
shown that their sequestration Is essential
to the plaintiffs protection, receiver will
be appointed.
Intervention Of Equity
The present case may be likened to one
involving the title to large tract Of land
occupied by numerous tenants, who, by
reason Of the controversy over the title,
may hesitate TO pay rent to either claimant.
LIN such a case equity has interviewed and
appointed e receiver to collect the rents
and hold the same pending the determine
tion Of the question Of title.
But another reason presents itself why
such appointment should be made as
against the Crystal Springs Land and Wa
ter Company, and that is in the habitual
but variable admixture Of the waters de-
rived from the Crystal Springs property
and the water taken from the Los Angeles
River-an arrangement which makes Il
wellnigh impossible to determine what pro-
portion Of the aggregate revenues should
be accredited to the waters Of the Los An
geles River and what to the waters taken
from the Crystal Springs property.
Through the agency Of a receiver. BE-
lieve. this confusion may be obviated.
To Prevent Litigation
Believing that the appointment of a re-
ceiver will prevent vsxatious and pro-
longed litigation with the users Of water.
and avoid the loss Of a considerable por-
tion Of the revenues accruing from the
distribution Of water to the consumers who
would otherwise elude payment, I am Of
the opinion that equity demands the ap-
pointment Of receiver here. am mindful
Of the importance Of an early determine
tion OF the matters here in controversy,
and have therefore attempted no elabo-
rate or learned discussion of the many In
teresting questions suggested by counsel
during the argument or in their briefs
subsequently presented. On the contrary.
1t has been my purpose to avoid, 50 far as
possible, the expression Of any opinion
which might hereafter embarrass the trial
OF these cases. Having in mind only such
matters as are now properly before the
court for determination. I am Of the opin-
ion:
The Decision
I. That the objection made by
counsel for the water companies to the
filing Of the affidavit Of the city attor-
ney be overruled; that the proposed
amendment to the answer Of the citv
and others in case No. 81 ,177 should be
allowed and considered on this hear
ing, and that the answering affidavit
Of 8. n. Mott and ]. 9. Drake, ,lmade on
the 18th day Of August, 1898, shall
also be considered on this hearing.
q. That the general demurrers in
terposed by the city to the complaints
in cases Nos. 81, 176 and 81 LIT should
be overrruled.
8. That the city Of Los Angeles
should pendente lite be enjoined from
seizing the distributing system Of
pipes and fumes now being used to
convey water to the city Of Los An
geles and its inhabitants, and from in
terfering with the management and
control Of said property or the collec-
tion Of water rates and revenues de-
rived therefrom.
a. That the water companies, their
officers, agents and employees should,
pendente lite, be enjoinedI froml col
lecting water rates.
5. That receiver should be ap-
pointed to receive and collect the water
rates, and to hold the moneys 80 col
lected subject to the further orders Of
the court in the premises. The ap-
propriate orders will be made accol d.
ingly. FRANKF. osTER,
Judge Presiding.
September 8, 1893.
Awaiting Dunn's Return
At the conclusion of the reading Of the
decision Senator White of the water COM
pany's counsel informed the court that all
the facilities for collecting the water rates
are now in the possession of the water COM
company.
The court said he would name receiver
at once, but preferred that the attorneys
for both sides agree upon man for the