J 24 i<ts:i and game commission 



of Judge Stephens of Los Angeles which seemed to deprive the Commis- 

 sion of all quasi-judicial powers, including that of holding hearings. 

 The Supreme Court, however, decided in favor of petitioner. While 

 a technical defeat for the division, it was, in reality, a victory because 

 it restored to the division the right to hold hearings and pass quasi- 

 judicially on matters intrusted to it by the legislature. 



Ocean Industries, Inc., vs. Superior Court, etc., 200 Cal. 235. This 

 was a petition to the Supreme Court by the Ocean Industries, Inc., for 

 a writ of prohibition to prevent the superior court in and for the county 

 of Santa Cruz and Hon. H. C. Lucas, judge thereof, from proceeding 

 further in a case entitled People of the State of California vs. Ocean 

 Industries, Inc. In the latter case the division sought to enjoin the 

 operations of the defendant on the steamer Peralta which had been 

 anchored in Monterey Bay more than three miles offshore but within 

 the confines of the bay. That concern had started to reduce fish in a 

 manner contrary to the provisions of the Fish Reduction Act above 

 referred to. To this petition the division filed a demurrer. The peti- 

 tion for the writ was denied. In a lengthy opinion the court upheld 

 the jurisdiction of the state over the Avaters of Monterey Bay. 



In re Makings, 73 Cal. Dec. 260. This was an application for a writ 

 of habeas corpus directed to the constable at Sausalito to secure the 

 release of petitioner from custody. He was being held on charge of 

 transferring crabs from fish and game district li to Sausalito. This 

 case attacked the constitutionality of that portion of section 628 of the 

 Penal Code commonly known as the Humboldt crab law. Petitioner 

 claimed that that portion of the act which prohibited him from export- 

 ing crabs from Humboldt County was unconstitutional. On May 17, 

 1926, the District Court of Appeal upheld the law and denied the writ. 

 Thereafter the petitioner brought the case before the Supreme Court, 

 which affirmed the decision of the District Court of Appeal and sus- 

 tained the contention of the division. 



Zuanich vs. Zellerbach et al. This was a petition sought out in the 

 Supreme Court for a writ of supersedeas to prevent the Fish and Game 

 Commission from enforcing a judgment rendered in the superior court 

 of Santa Cruz County condemning certain fish nets used in conjunction 

 with the operations of Ocean Industries, Inc. To this petition the Com- 

 mission demurred. Before the matter was submitted, it was settled out 

 of court and the appeal was thereupon dismissed. 



Andrew Zamberlin vs. Zellerbach et cd. Same as previous case. 



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 



Ocean Industries, Inc., vs. Zellerbach et al. This was a proceeding 

 for injunction instituted by the Ocean Industries, Inc., combined with 

 an action to recover damages from the Fish and Game Commissioners 

 and several of the division employees. The suit was a result of steps 

 taken by the division and its employees to prevent the operations of the 

 Ocean Industries, Inc., in Monterey Bay on board the stamer Peralta. 

 Extent of jurisdiction of the State of California over the waters of 

 Monterey Bay was the legal question involved. The division demurred 

 to the complaint and after oral argument an opinion was handed down 

 by District Judge St. Sure upholding the contention of the division 



