Page images
PDF
EPUB

Cal. 167, 32 Pac. 979; Trezevant v. Strong Co., 102 Cal. 48, 36 Pac. 395; Brady v. Times-Mirror Co., 106 Cal. 58, 39 Pae. 209; Griffin ete. Co. v. Magnolia etc. Co., 107 Cal. 380, 40 Pac. 495; Lakeshore C. Co. v. Modoc L. & L. Co., 108 Cal. 262, 41 Pac. 472; Ivey v. Kern Co. Land Co., 115 Cal. 200, 46 Pac. 926; Bowers v. Modoc ete. Land Co., 117 Cal. 52, 48 Pac. 979; Brown v. S. F. Savings Union, 122 Cal. 648, 55 Pac. 598; Miller & Lux v. Kern Co. Land Co., 134 Cal. 587, 56 Pac. 856; Winchester v. Howard, 136 Cal. 439, 89 Am. St. Kep. 153, 64 Pac. 692, 69 Pac. 77.)

Annotation.

Place of Trial.- This section is of the nature of a code provision in regard to procedure, and is to be construed as other code provisions are, except that it cannot be amended or repealed by the legislature, and is self-executing. (Miller & Lux v. Kern Co. Land Co., 134 Cal. 586, 66 Pac. 856; Winchester v. Howard, 136 Cal. 432, 89 Am. St. Rep. 153, 64 Pac. 692, 69 Pac. 77.)

It is merely permissive and not mandatory. (Fresno Nat. Bank v. Superior Court, 83 Cal. 491, 24 Pac. 157. To same effect: Griffin etc. Co. v. Magnolia etc. Co., 107 Cal. 381, 40 Pac. 495.)

It applies to actions of tort as well as matters of contract. (Lewis v. Southern Pac. R. R. Co., 66 Cal. 209, 5 Pac. 79; Miller & Lux v. Kern Co. Land Co., 134 Cal. 586, 66 Pac. 856; Brady v. Times. Mirror Co., 106 Cal. 56, 37 Pac. 209.)

It gives to the plaintiff the right to elect either to sue the corporation in the county where the contract is made, or is to be performed, or where the obligation or liability arises, or the breach occurs, or in the county where the principal place of business of the corporation is situated. (Trezevant v. Strong Co., 102 Cal. 47, 36 Pac. 395.)

This section applies to an association not formally a corporation. (Kendrick v. Diamond etc. Min. Co., 94 Cal. 137, 29 Pac. 324.)

Residence of Corporation-Principal Place of Business. The prin. cipal place of business of a corporation is not its residence within the meaning of section 395, Code of Civil Procedure, regulating the place of trial of actions. (California etc. R. R. v. Southern Pacific R. R. Co., 65 Cal. 394, 4 Pac. 344. Overruled: Cohn v. Railroad Co., 71 Cal. 490, 12 Pac. 498; Fresno National Bank v Superior Court, 83 Cal. 497, 24 Pac. 157; Buck v. Eureka, 97 Cal. 139, 31 Pac. 845.)

The principal place of business of a corporation is its residence, within the meaning of that term as used in section 395, fixing the place of trial of actions. (Cohn v. C. P. R. Co., 71 Cal. 488, 12 Pac. 498.)

This section has no application to municipal corporations. (Buck v. City of Eureka, 97 Cal. 135, 31 Pac. 845.)

Corporation may be sued in county of principal place of business. (Fresno National Bank v. Superior Court, 83 Cal. 491, 24 Pac. 157. To same effect: Buck v. Eureka, 97 Cal. 135, 31 Pac. 845; Trezevant v. Strong, 102 Cal. 49, 36 Pac. 395.) The place of residence of a corporation is the county where its principal place of business is situated and is the place of trial within the meaning of section 395 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (McSherry v. Pennsylvania etc. G. M. Co., 97 Cal. 637, 32 Pac. 711.)

The place of residence of a corporation is where it has its principal place of business, but it is not absolutely entitled to a change to county of residence when sued where the liability arose. (Treze. vant v. Strong Co., 102 Cal. 47, 36 Pac. 395. To same effect: Jager v. Bridge Co., 104 Cal. 544, 38 Pac. 413.)

Contracts.-Action against insurance company organized under the laws of this state may be brought and tried in county where contract of insurance was completed, and corporation is not entitled to change of place of trial to county where it has its principal place of business, if contract was not completed therein, although policy was issued there. (Yore v. Bankers etc. Co., 88 Cal. 609, 26 Pac. 514.)

Corporation may be suel in any county where its breach of obligation occurred, as well as where it has its principal place of business. (Chase v. Southern Pacific C. R. R., 83 Cal. 468, 23 Pac. 532.)

In an action against a corporation upon a contract made in the county of the venue, the corporation is not entitled to change the place of trial to another county in which it has its principal place of business. (Whitney v. Seller's Com. Co., 130 Cal. 188, 62 Pac. 472.)

A corporation is entitled to a change of venue to the county where it has its principal place of business when the contract sued on was not made or was not to be performed in another county in which it was doing business. (Byrum v. Stockton etc. Works, 91 Cal. 657, 27 Pac. 1093.)

The right to sue a corporation in the county where the contract was made only applies when the corporation is the sole defendant in the case.

(Griffin etc. Co. v. Magnolia etc. Co., 107 Cal. 378, 40 Pac. 495.)

An association of persons organized for a particular purpose, although not formally a corporation, is included in this section. The word “association” does not necessarily mean an association pos. sessing corporate powers and privileges. (Kendrick v. Diamond etc. Min. Co., 94 Cal. 137, 29 Pac. 324.)

Libel.– Under this section an action for libel may be maintained in the county in which the plaintiff resides, when the newspaper is circulated in that county but published in another. (Brady v. Times-Mirror Co., 106 Cal. 56, 39 Pac. 209.)

But where the plaintiff sues other persons than the corporation publishing the paper, he waives the provisions of this section. (Brady v. Times-Mirror Co., 106 Cal. 56, 39 Pac. 209.)

Real Property.-An action against a corporation for leave to redeem real estate is properly brought in the county where the real property is situated. (Baker v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 73 Cal. 182, 14 Pac. 686.)

In action against corporation to condemn lands for the use of a railroad, the county in which the lands are situated is the proper county for the commencement and trial of the action. (California etc. R. R. v. Southern P. R. R., 65 Cal. 409, 4 Pac. 388. To same effect: Fresno etc. Bank v. Superior Court, 83 Cal. 491, 24 Pac. 157. Note citation: Morris v. Ry. Co., 22 Am. St. Rep. 23.)

Under Section 392, Code of Civil Procedure, an action against a corporation to have a deed absolute on its face declared to be a mortgage, and to redeem the same, is properly brought in the county in which the real estate is situated. (Baker v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 73 Cal. 182, 14 Pac, 686. Note citation: Morris v. Railway Co., 22 Am. St. Rep. 24.)

Where purchaser of land was directed to make his payments to the agent of the corporation in the county where the land was situated, upon full payment being made there, plaintiff was entitled to have delivered to him at that place and at the time of full payment a conveyance of the land, and the contract must be deemed to have been broken in that county. (Ivey v. Kern Land Company, 115 Cal. 196, 46 Pac. 926.)

An action for breach of a contract of a corporation, to convey land situated in a county other than that of its principal place of business, is triable at the election of plaintiff in the county where the contract was made or was to be performed. (Ivey v. Land Co., 115 Cal. 196, 46 Pac. 926.)

Where action is brought in county where both corporations have their principal place of business for injury to real property in another county the defendant is not entitled as of right to have the case heard in the latter county. (Miller & Lux v. Kern Co. Land Co., 134 Cal. 586, 56 Pac. 856.)

Damages.-In an action against a corporation for damages for breach of contract, the defendant is entitled to a change of place of trial to the county in which its principal place of business is situated, when the county in which the action is brought is not the one in which the contract was made, or was to be performed, or in which the obligation arose, or in which the principal place of business is situated. (Cohn v. Central Pac. R. R. Co., 71 Cal. 488, 12 Pac. 498.)

Action for damages against railway company may be tried in court where injury was inflicted and defendant corporation has no right to have place of trial changed to county where it has its prin. cipal place of business. (Lewis v. S. P. C. Co., 66 Cal. 209, 5 Pac. 79. To same effect: National Bank v. Superior Court, 83 Cal. 496, 24 Pac. 157; Trezevant v. Strong Co., 102 Cal. 49, 36 Pac. 395; Brady v. Times Co., 106 Cal. 58, 39 Pac. 209.)

An action for damages for injury occasioned by the negligence of a corporation may be commenced and tried in the county where the injury was received, and the corporation is not entitled as of right to a change of venue to the county where is located the principal place of business. (Jager v. California Bridge Co., 104 Cal. 542, 38 Pac. 413.)

Change of Venue-Bias of Judge.-The bias and prejudice of a judge against the defendant corporation and its president and resident manager is not a disqualification, and will not entitle the defendant to a change of the place of trial. (Bulwer C. M. Co. v. Standard etc. Co., 83 Cal. 613, 23 Pac. 1109.)

Foreign Corporation - Residence of.-Foreign corporation doing business here has no residence within the state, and an action against it may be tried in any county designated by the plaintiff in the complaint. (Thomas v. Placerville etc. Co., 65 Cal. 600, 4 Pac. 641.)

But a plaintiff is entitled to sue a corporation in the county where a contract was made only when the corporation is the sole defend. ant in the action and if he joins others who reside in a different county, they are entitled to change of venue to the county of their residence. (Griffin v. Magnolia etc. Co., 107 Cal. 378, 40 Pac. 495.)

TRANSPORTATION COMPANIES, RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES

OF.

Sec. 17, Art. XII. All railroad, canal, and other transportation companies are declared to be common carriers, and subject to legislative control. Any association or corporation, organized for the purpose, under the laws of this state, shall have the right to connect at the state line with railroads of other states. Every railroad company shall have the right with its road to intersect, connect with or cross any other railroad, and shall receive and transport each the other's passengers, tonnage, and cars, without delay or discrimination.

Legislative History.

This and the subsequent sections of this article have no parallel in the Constitution of 1849. The purpose of their adoption was to place the railroad and other transportation companies under legislative control, and to prevent exorbitant and discriminating charges hy railroad and other transportation companies. (Railroad Commrs. v. Market St. Ry. Co., 132 Cal. 678, 64 Pac. 1065; Constitutional Debates, pp. 453-624.)

Section Cited.

Railroad Commrs. v. Market St. Ry. Co., 132 Cal. 685, 64 Pac. 1065.

OFFICERS OF CORPORATIONS, RESTRICTION AS TO INTER

ESTS. Sec. 18, Art. XII. No president, director, officer, agent, or employee of any railroad or canal company shall be interested, directly or indirectly, in the furnishing of material or supplies to such company, nor in the business of transportation as a common carrier of freight or passengers over the works owned, leased, controlled, or worked by such company, except such interest in the business of transportation as lawfully flows from the ownership of stock therein.

Legislative History.

See section 17, ante.

Section Cited.

Railroad Commrs. v. Market St. Ry., 132 Cal. 686, 64 Pac. 1065.

FREE PASSES ON RAILROADS PROHIBITED TO STATE OFFI.

CIALS.

Sec. 19, Art. XII. No railroad or other transportation company shall grant free passes, or passes or tickets at a discount, to any person holding any office of honor, trust, or profit in this state; and the acceptance of any such pass or ticket, by a member of the legislature or any public officer, other than railroad commissioner, shall work a forfeiture of his office.

Legislative History.

See section 17, ante.

Section Cited.

Railroad Commrs. v. Market St. Ry. Co., 132 Cal. 686, 64 Pac. 1065.

« PreviousContinue »