Legal Opinion
Jahn v. Sixth Judicial District Court
Nevada Supreme Court
Decided November 18, 1937No. 3208PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By the Court,
Hatton, District Judge:
These proceedings arise out of the claim of the Humboldt Lovelock Irrigation, Light & Power Company (hereinafter referred to as “the company”) to a vested right to take and store annually a minimum of 49,770 acre-feet of water of the Humboldt river, together with the right to control the distribution of such water, free from interference on the part of the state engineer.
Pursuant to such claim of right, the company filed in the Sixth judicial district court, in case No. 2804, entitled: “In the Matter of the Determination of the Relative Rights of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In Re Water RightsNevada Supreme Court · 1926
- Ruddell v. Sixth Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 1933
- City of Los Angeles v. Eighth Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 1937
- State Ex Rel. Malone v. District Court of Sixth Judicial DistrictNevada Supreme Court · 1930
- State Ex Rel. Nevada Douglass Gold Mines, Inc. v. District Court of Seventh Judicial DistrictNevada Supreme Court · 1929
3Cited by10 opinions
- United States v. Humboldt Lovelock Irr. Light & Power Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
- In Re Nevada State Engr. Ruling No. 5823Nevada Supreme Court · 2012
- Churchill County v. State EngineerNevada Supreme Court · 2012
- McCormick v. Sixth Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 1952
- G. & M. Properties v. Second Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 1979
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.