Silver Lake Power & Irrigation Co. v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mono County, and from an order denying a new trial. J. D. Murphy, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Respondent’s predecessors in interest first conceived the plan of utilizing the waters of Owens River and of Rock Creek, one of its tributaries, for irrigation and for the development of hydro-electric energy. They made locations upon the river and creek for these purposes. They began their work under these locations and they prosecuted this work until it was interrupted and suspended by withdrawal orders of the government of the United States. Under the compulsion of these withdrawal orders the predecessors, in interest of respondent ceased work. These withdrawal orders were temporary in…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United States v. Midwest Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Bear Lake & River Water Works & Irrigation Co. v. GarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Chrisman v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Myer v. Car Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Pool v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Fullerton v. State Water Resources Control BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- County of Amador v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Miller & Lux, Inc. v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- County of Tuolumne v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- City of Los Angeles v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930