Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000153 117

Image

File
Download upr000153-117.tif (image/tiff; 26.25 MB)

Information

Digital ID

upr000153-117
Details

Rights

This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.

Digital Provenance

Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room

Publisher

University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries

gas, to certain named towns and cities, ’and to other cities, villages, and places in the counties aforesaid,* does not obligate the company to furnish gas to consumers in all of such cities and towns.” In Atchison, etc. Ry. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 173 Cal. 577» 16Q "jp. 828, test was made of the validity of an order of the Railroad Commission requiring the Santa Fe to construct and operate a line of railroad between Oceanside in San Diego County and Temecula in Riverside County. The latter point had never been served by the Santa Fe* The sense of the opinion of the court is summed up in the following syllabi, which are quoted verbatims ”Railroad Commission-Public Utility— Taking Property for Public Use— Requiring property to be Used for Mew service.— A pub­lic utility, undertaking to supply a given public need, submits itself to the regulation and control of public au­thority with respect to the service which it has thus un­dertaken. But to require it to devote its property to a service which it has never professed to render is to take that property pro tanto, and such taking cannot be justi­fied except under the power of eminent domain upon just compensation. ”Id.— Supply of Transportation Needs by Railroad.— A railroad company, in constructing a line between given points, does not undertake to supply the transportation needs of any territory not reached by its lines. «jd.— Extension of Railroad Lines— Policy to be Determined by Directors.— The question whether a railroad company shall extend its lines to points not theretofore reached by it, whether, in other words, it shall engage in a new and ad­ditional enterprise, is one of policy to be determined by its directors.” The Court cites and quotes with approval, the case of Del Mar Water, Light & Power Company vs. Eahleman, 167 Cal. 666, 140 p73"9I. The facts in the Del Mar case are substantially parallel to the present situation. In that case, the water com­pany made application for a writ of review in the California Su­preme Court to set aside an order of the Railroad Commission re­quiring it to deliver water for the use of one Glass, who owned property in the area known as the Del Mar Heights Tract. It ap­peared that in 1906 the South Coast Land Company was Incorporated and bought the townsite of Del Mar. In 1908 the Land Company contracted with Santa Fe Land improvement Company, thereby ac­quiring well sites six miles from Del Mar. It also agreed to fur­nish water to the Santa Fe Railway. At the same time the land I