Reno Water Co. v. Leete
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Washoe County. The facts appear in the opinion. After reviewing the evidence, claim that in any view that may be taken of this case, Hill is the owner of the reservoir and the system of pipes to which we are attached, or else be is a tenant in common of the whole system with the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Washoe County. The facts appear in the opinion. After reviewing the evidence, claim that in any view that may be taken of this case, Hill is the owner of the reservoir and the system of pipes to which we are attached, or else be is a tenant in common of the whole system with the plaintiff. In either case our right is good; for if it belongs to Hill alone, then the plaintiff has no right to claim the water after it turned into our reservoir and pipes. It would then either belong to Hill or Leete, under his deed. It would answer…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Belknap, J.:
In the year 1874 George B. Hill was the owner of a system of water works in the town of Keno, by which the inhabitants of a portion of the town were supplied with water. The water thus furnished was taken from the Truekee river by means of two ditches, known as the English mill and Countryman ditches. Whilst Hill was engaged in operating this system of water works — -the pipes of which were wooden— he conveyed to the defendant a town lot, “ together with,” as the record recites, ‘ ‘ one inch of water from the Hill system of water pipes.”
At this time there was another…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ricord v. Central Pacific RailroadNevada Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fernald v. Spokane & British Columbia Telephone & Telegraph Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1903