Miller and Lux v. Kern County Etc. Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of tbe City and County of San Francisco and from an order refusing a new trial. J. M. Seawell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
The appeal is from the judgment and from the order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial. The essential allegations of the complaint are that the copartnership of Miller & Lux, James B. Haggin and others, owned lands and conflicting claims to land, and water-rights and conflicting claims to water-rights on Kern River; that in adjustment of the litigation which had sprung up because of their hostile interests, a written agreement was entered into; that one of the purposes to be accomplished by the agreement was the supplying water to all the lands of Miller & Lux; that to this…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stoner v. ZuckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Anderson v. Bank of Lassen CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Terpenning v. GallupSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
- Vanalstine v. WhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
3Cited by12 opinions
- Bomberger v. McKelveyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Bastanchury v. Times-Mirror Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
- Cooke v. RamponiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Roberts v. ColyearCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Rentfro v. DettwilerMontana Supreme Court · 1933
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.