Farley v. Spring Valley Mining & Irrigating Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment for the defendant and an order denying a new trial in the Superior Court of Butte County. Hundley, J.
1Opinion of the Court
McKinstry, J.:
The action was brought to recover damages for alleged injury to plaintiff’s lands, caused by the flooding of them by respondent’s reservoir, and for an injunction.
At the trial plaintiff’s case showed that he proved up and paid for the land he claims (as part of the public- domain) after the defendant’s reservoir was built and filled. A non-suit was granted by the Court below.
The eighty acres claimed by plaintiff was public land of the United States until the plaintiff proved up his claim and paid for the land in 1877. Until then Congress had full power to withdraw the land from…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Frisbie v. WhitneySupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Jennison v. KirkSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Osgood v. El Dorado Water & Deep Gravel Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1880
- Broder v. Natoma Water & Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by8 opinions
- De Necochea v. CurtisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- South Yuba Water & Mining Co. v. RosaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Ellis v. Pomeroy Improvement Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1889
- McGuire v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Southern Pacific Co. v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.