THIRTY-FIRST BIENNIAL REPORT 135 



The following is a resume of the major cases handled by the legal 

 department during this biennium. 



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 



Van Camp Sea Food, Inc., et al. vs. Department of Natural Resources. 

 This action was commenced in the U. S. District Court at Los Angeles 

 to restrain the department and its officers from executing the state 

 statute limiting and restricting the use of sardines in reduction plants 

 within California. Inasmuch as the proceeding attacked the constitu- 

 tionality of the fish reduction act (Stats. 1925, chapter 525), the matter 

 was heard before a court of three judges, of whom one was a judge of 

 the U. S. Circuit Court of Appeal. Decision was rendered in favor of 

 the Department of Natural Resources and the complaint of Van Camp 

 Sea Food Co. et al. was dismissed. 



SUPERIOR COURT 



People vs. Associated Oil Company. This is an action commenced in 

 Los Angeles County to enjoin seventy oil operators at Huntington 

 Beach from polluting the waters of the Pat-ific Ocean with petroleum. 

 The case went to trial before Judge Leon Yankwieh at Los Angeles. It 

 was tlismissed as to several of the defendants prior to the trial and 

 during the trial in view of the fact that they had altered the method 

 of operation so that future pollution would be impossible. "With these 

 exceptions, however, judcrment was made and entered on August 29, 

 1928, against all defendants except two. Sub.sequently some of the 

 defendants made motions for new trials which were denied. 



People vs. Submarine Oil Company et al . This is an action to 

 restrain four oil producers from polluting the waters of the Pacific 

 Ocean at Summerland with petroleum. In this action the Commission 

 was successful and injunction was entered on April 19, 3929. 



People vs. Gibson et al. This is an action commenced in the superior 

 court of Trinity County to enjoin the defendants from maintaining a 

 dam until such time as they install a fish ladder as required by law. 

 This action was set for trial but was subsequently dismissed when the 

 defendants installed the fish ladder required. 



People vs. Enos et al. This is a suit instituted in Trinity County 

 similar to the previous case. This case terminated in the same manner 

 as the previous ease, when the defendants installed their fish ladder. 



People vs. Central Mendocino Power Co. This is an action instituted 

 by the division in Mendocino County to enjoin the defendant power 

 company from maintaining a dam in James Creek until such time as 

 it installs a fish ladder therein in accordance with an order of the divi- 

 sion. Judgment rendered in favor of the defendant on March 5, 1928. 

 No further action has been taken due to the findings of the trial court 

 that the stream course had become so altered that fish no longer ascend 

 to the location of the dam. 



People vs. Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District. This is an action insti- 

 tuted by the division in the superior court of Glenn County to enjoin 

 the defendant district from diverting water from the Sacramento River 

 into its irrigating ditches until such time as it installs a fish screen at 



