Davis v. Devanney
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Lincoln County. The parties to this action never were parties in any suit in which the right to the use of any of the said waters of Little Wood river was decreed to them, and even if the respondent was granted the right to the use of any of said water it can have no binding force whatever upon either of the said appellants,- as they were not parties to the action in which such a judgment was rendered. (Stocher v. Kirtley, 6 Idaho, 795, 59 Pac.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Lincoln County. The parties to this action never were parties in any suit in which the right to the use of any of the said waters of Little Wood river was decreed to them, and even if the respondent was granted the right to the use of any of said water it can have no binding force whatever upon either of the said appellants,- as they were not parties to the action in which such a judgment was rendered. (Stocher v. Kirtley, 6 Idaho, 795, 59 Pac. "891; 2 Black on Judgments, sec. 600.) One cannot obtain a right by prescription or adverse user when occupying and having…
1Opinion of the CourtQuarles, C. J.
This action was commenced by the appellants, as plaintiffs, to quiet the title claimed by them in and to a certain ditch and dam, and to obtain a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, respondent here, from interfering with their use and occupation of said ditch and dam. The answer denies title in the appellants, and, among other things, alleges: “That the defendant built and constructed said ditch and dam, and is, and has always been, the owner thereof exclusively for seven years last past; and said plaintiffs, nor either of them, nor their predecessors in interest,- nor any of…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cited by8 opinions
- Rutledge v. City of EurekaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Howard Park Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Bower v. KollmeyerIdaho Supreme Court · 1918
- Uhrlaub v. McMahonIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Union Contracting & Paving Co. v. CampbellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.