Los Angeles herald., 1905-03-07
MAKES RULING IN
IRRIGATION CASE

Judge Trask yesterday in the supe-
rior court handed down an important
decision in the now famous case of P.
T. Evans against the San Jacinto and
Pleasant Valley Irrigation district,
which in it's present stage is cognizable
only in the superior court of Riverside
county.
The case involves nearly s1,OOO,O 900 and
this sum of money in its present transi-
tory state is subject to the whim of
much debated point in constitutional
law
The defendant district was formed
many years ago under the Wright act,
and shortly afterward the proceedings
were confirmed and the district was
declared to be legally organized by the
superior court of San Diego county.
Some time after the confirmation pro-
ceedings were had Riverside county, in
which the irrigation district is now To-
Gated, was carved out of old San Diego
county, and the superior court of Riv-
erside county became the scene of the
future difficulties of the corporation.
Subsequent to the confirmation pro-
ceedings in the superior court at San
Diego bonds were issued and sold to
numerous persons for valuable con-
sderation.
The troubles of the ill-fated corpora
ton began to brew, however, when, at
the instigation of numerous persons,
the attorney general of California
brought an action in quo warranto in
the superior court at Riverside as a
result of which it was adjudged by the
court that the district had never been
legally organized and it's existence was
challenged.
After the Riverside court had con-
demned the district to death, P. T. Ev-
ans, bondholder, brought an action to
recover judgment for interest on the
bonds purchased from the irrigation
district.
Leave to File Answer
William ]. McEuen, the president of
the ill-fated corporation, appeared be-
fore the court and asked leave to file
an answer to the action brought by
Evans, in which he intended to show as
a defense that the district had been
dissolved by an order of the court.
While the decision rendered by Judge
Trask denies the petition of President
McEuen, nevertheless the court grants
him leave to appear and enter de-
tense to the action.
In reality Judge Trask holds in ef-
feet against the decision of the River
side court which denied the existence
of a corporation.
In concluding his decision Judge
Trask says:
whether the plaintiff can enforce his
rights is not the question now. The
sole question is whether leave should
be given to file the proposed answer.
AS 1 have concluded that this proposed
answer states no defense to plaintiffs
action, leave will be denied. Ordinarily
leave to file the proposed answer would
be given and the questions here dis
cussed would be determined by ruling
ON a demurrer or In determining all the
issues upon trial of the action. But
at the request of counsel l have passed
upon these questions now and have
stated my reasons. Leave to file the
proposed answer is denied, but William
j. McEuen is granted ten days within
which to appear in said action and de-
fend the same in behalf of the said de-
fendant."
Judge Trask ventured the opinion
that this important case would ulti-
mately find it's way into the supreme
court of the United States.
The principal trouble with the aver
age young man is that he has $4,000
a-year girl and s15-a-week salary
Chicago Record Herald.