City of L.A. v. L.A. Farming & Milling Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the superior court of Los Angeles County, and from orders finding facts in addition to stipulated facts, and denying a motion to recite the findings, to correct the conclusions of law, and to enter a different judgment for defendant on the stipulated facts. N. P. Conrey, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.
The plaintiff is a municipal corporation. Its corporate territory is situated on the Los Angeles River, an unnavigable stream which rises in the San Fernando Valley several miles above and northerly of the city and flows southerly until it reaches the northern corporate boundaries of the city. The defendant is the owner in fee of land on and riparian to said river and situated about ten miles above the city. The plaintiff claims, as successor of a Spanish and Mexican pueblo, the prior and paramount ownership of the use of the water of the river from its source to the city and from the surface…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hardin v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- City of Los Angeles v. PomeroyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Andrews v. AndrewsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Vernon Irrigation Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- City of Los Angeles v. City of San FernandoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- City of San Diego v. Cuyamaca Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
- Stearns v. Los Angeles City School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- City of Los Angeles v. HunterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- City of Las Vegas v. OmanNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.