Consolidated Peoples Ditch Co. v. Foothill Ditch Co.
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRichards, J.
This action was commenced by the plaintiffs, eighteen in number, to quiet the title of themselves and each of them in and to the use of the waters of the Kaweah River, located mainly in the county of Tulare, and to restrain a threatened diversion of such waters to the injury of said plaintiffs and each of them. The plaintiffs sought and obtained from the superior court in and for the county of Tulare a temporary injunction restraining certain of said defendants from proceeding to do the acts of diversion which it is averred in their verified complaint the said defendants are preparing to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Katz v. WalkinshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation Dist. v. Superior Court of Tulare Cty.California Supreme Court · 1920
- Thayer v. California Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Hildreth v. Montecito Creek Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
- Barton v. Riverside Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Continental Baking Co. v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Tulare Irrigation District v. Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Salt Lake County v. Holliday Water Co.Utah Supreme Court · 2010
- Fort Vannoy Irrigation District v. Water Resources CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 2008
- Santa Clarita Organization for Planning & the Environment v. Castaic Lake Water AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.