Legal Opinion

Marysville Development Co. v. Hargis

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided July 31, 1925PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGivens, J.

— Appellant through mesne conveyances became the owner of what was commenced as a Carey Irrigation system and brought suit to foreclose because of nonpayment a water right contract issued by the original company to respondent’s assignor. Respondent denied that anything was due and unpaid on the contract and claimed overpayment of $58.54, which appellant admitted to the extent of $20.73 as an offset against the amount claimed to be due. From judgment for respondent entered by the court after trial without a jury the appeal was taken.

The records of one of the intermediary companies introduced…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Fawcett v. Nampa & Meridian Irrigation DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Cunningham v. SpringerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Wetmore v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
  4. Dreyfus v. RobertsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
  5. C. S. Brackett Co. v. LofgrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Gholson v. SavinOhio Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Shore v. PetersonIdaho Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Reynolds Irr. Dist. v. SproatIdaho Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Weisel v. BEAVER SPRINGS OWNERS ASS'N, INC.Idaho Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Ashby v. HubbardIdaho Supreme Court · 1979

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API