Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. Miller & Lux, Inc.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Edward F. Treadwell, McCutchen, Olney & Willard, and McCutchen, Willard, Mannon & Greene, for Appellants, in L. A. No. 4993, and for Respondents in L. A. No. 4994. Hunsaker, Britt & Edwards and Hunsaker, Britt & Cosgrove for Respondent in L. A. No. 4993 and for Appellant in L. A. No. 4994.
1Opinion of the Court
Case No. 4993.
SHAW, J.
The defendants, Miller & Lux, Incorporated, and Kern County Land Company, separately, appeal from portions of the judgment. They also respectively appeal from the order of the court denying motions to vacate the judgment and enter a different judgment on the findings and from the order of the court denying motions for a new trial. All the appeals are presented in one transcript of the record.
The complaint alleges that the plaintiff is the owner of a certain proportion of the waters of Kern River; that the defendants each claim interests or rights in the waters belonging…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Alta Land & Water Co. v. HancockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- In re the estate of MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Anaheim Union Water Co. v. Fuller.California Supreme Court · 1907
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Flynn v. FlynnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Fall River Valley Irrigation District v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1927
- Gavina v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Coulter v. Sausalito Bay Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932
- Dexter v. PiersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.