Legal Opinion
Imperial Water Co. No. 4 v. Meserve
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 19, 1923No. Civ. No. 3811PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFinlayson, P. J.
The defendants Edwin A. Meserve and Harry W. Meserve have appealed from a judgment in favor of plaintiff in an action brought by it against appellants and one D. L. Smith to recover a sum alleged to be due from the three defendants for water sold and delivered to them by plaintiff.
This is a companion case to Imperial Water Co. No. 4 v. Meserve, ante, p. 593 [217 Pac. 548]. The water for the price of which this action was brought was delivered to and used upon a tract of 320 acres of land owned by the defendant Edwin A. Meserve. The complaint, mutatis mit tandis, is similar to that which…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Goldstein v. HealyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Cooke v. MesmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Adams v. WallaceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Kinsel v. BallouCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Bodine v. Times-Journal Pub. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Everts v. MattesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Liquidating Midland Bank v. SteckerOhio Court of Appeals · 1930
- Hille v. JohnstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927