Crum v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
A rehearing was granted in this case to give further consideration to two points discussed in our former opinion. The first point has to do with the proper interpretation of the case of Joerger v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp., 214 Cal. 630 [7 Pac. (2d) 706], and the application of the rule of that case to the facts of this case. Upon further consideration we are of the opinion that the discussion of the Joerger case was not necessary to the opinion and may be stricken therefrom without in any way affecting the result. The opinions of the District Courts Of Appeal in these cases have…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Gin S. Chow v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Collier v. Merced Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Duckworth v. Watsonville Water & Light Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
- Fall River Valley Irrigation District v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1927
- Turner v. the James Canal Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Joslin v. Marin Municipal Water DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- Sturgeon v. FrostSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
- Tusher v. GabrielsenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Transport Clearings-Bay Area v. SimmondsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Albaugh v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1937
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.