Kimball v. Gearhart
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Fourteenth District, County of Sierra. This was an action for damages for the diversion of water from the ditch of plaintiff. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court, with the exception of certain instructions which were given by the Court to the jury.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Fourteenth District, County of Sierra. This was an action for damages for the diversion of water from the ditch of plaintiff. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court, with the exception of certain instructions which were given by the Court to the jury. The instructions given by the Court, at the request of the plaintiff, are as follows: “ 1. If the jury believe that the plaintiffs did, in July, 1854, project a ditch to receive the water now in dispute, and did give notice to the world of their intention to dig such ditch and appropriate such water, in the usual…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
This is an action for the diversion of water, and the main question was the privity of appropriation. On the trial the plaintiffs offered one Howe as a witness. He was sworn on his voir dire, and upon the facts stated by him on his examination, was objected to as incompetent because interested, and excluded by the Court. The correctness of this ruling is impeached by the appellants, and is the first error assigned. The facts which determine this question of the interest of the witness are these: Witness was, in 1854, an owner in the Yuba Ditch Company, in respect to the water of which this…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Thayer v. California Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Nightingale v. ScannellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Sargent v. SturmCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Steptoe Live Stock Co. v. GulleyNevada Supreme Court · 1931
- Greenwood v. GreenwoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.