Johnson v. Cella
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
PAULSEN, J. pro tem. *
This is an action to quiet title to an easement over defendants’ property for a % inch pipeline, together with the incidental right to enter and maintain the flow of water through said pipeline.
Plaintiffs also claimed damages incurred as a result of defendants’ action in shutting off the water and thereby depriving plaintiffs of household water and for loss of a sale of their property.
The court entered judgment quieting title to the easement in plaintiffs and awarding damages in the sum of $500, and costs.
Defendants’ motion for a new trial was denied. They now appeal…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kenniff v. CaulfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Rubio Cañon Land & Water Ass'n v. EverettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Pollard v. RebmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Powers v. PerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
3Cited by4 opinions
- Kytasty v. GodwinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- County of Contra Costa v. Central Contra Costa Sanitary DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Jones v. HarmonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- C&C Properties, Inc. v. Shell Pipeline CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2019