Legal Opinion
Stoner v. Zucker
California Supreme Court
Decided January 22, 1906No. L.A. No. 1436PublishedCited by 49 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Plaintiff pleaded that defendants had entered upon his land in 1899 tinder license, and had constructed thereon and thereover a ditch for the carrying of water; that he never conveyed or agreed to convey to the defendants any right of way, easement, or interest in the land for the purpose, and their right to construct and maintain the ditch rested wholly upon this license; that in 1900 he served notice upon them that the license to construct and operate the ditch had been revoked and abrogated by him. Notwithstanding this notice of revocation and abrogation, the defendants, disregarding it,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Maxwell v. Bay City Bridge Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Flickinger v. ShawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by49 opinions
- Bomberger v. McKelveyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Broads v. Mead and CookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- POWERS ET UX. v. Coos Bay Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1953
- Stepp v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Cooke v. RamponiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.