People v. Banning Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order refusing a new trial. Walter Bordwell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
Since the order was made in this ease, granting a rehearing after the judgment of this court rendered on December 20, 1913, the appellant, the Kerckhoff-Cuzner Mill and Lumber Company, has waived and abandoned all right or interest which it may have had in and to the small parcels of tide lands hereinafter mentioned, reserving only any rights it may have under any valid wharf franchises, and the parties thereupon have stipulated that the cause may again be submitted without further argument upon the other questions presented by the appeal. The rehearing was granted mainly for…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United States v. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Scranton v. WheelerSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Gibson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- People v. California Fish Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
- Hoadley v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Hays v. VanekCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- People v. ChambersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Richert v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Van Wagoner v. WhitmoreUtah Supreme Court · 1921
- Miramar Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.