Crescent Canal Co. v. Kings County Development Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.
The plaintiff has appealed from a judgment awarding the corporate defendant and cross-complainant, which will be referred to as the respondent, the right to its proportionate share of the water distributed by the plaintiff.
The appellant was organized under the laws of this state in 1885. Its purposes, as set forth in its articles, are to construct and operate canals; to acquire water rights; and to appropriate and divert water and distribute the same through its canals for agricultural and other purposes. Neither its articles nor its by-laws contain any provision restricting the use of such…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Estate of Thomas v. BryantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation District v. Wutchumna Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931
- Consolidated Peoples Ditch Co. v. Foothill Ditch Co.California Supreme Court · 1928
- Riverside Land Co. v. JarvisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Richey v. East Redlands Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Santa Clarita Organization for Planning & the Environment v. Castaic Lake Water AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- State v. Laramie Rivers Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1943
- De Boni Corp. v. Del Norte Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- City of Clearlake v. Highlands Mutual Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 2026
- Erdoisa v. South Side Bruneau Canal Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1942
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.