Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. Park
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.
This is an action to enforce a lien against certain land of the defendants Adeline B. Park and her husband, William Park, alleged to have been created by a certain instrument in writing made -by and between plaintiff and one Perrin, who was said defendants’ predecessor in interest in the land. The other defendants are made parties as claiming some interest in the premises. Defendants demurred to the complaint, and their demurrer was overruled. They declined to answer and judgment was rendered for plaintiff, and they ap peal from the judgment. It is admitted by appellants that all special…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. RowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Merrill v. Southside Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. DunbarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Clyne v. Benicia Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- San Diego Flume Co. v. ChaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Stanislaus Water Co. v. BachmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Leavitt v. Lassen Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Rank v. (Krug) United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1956
- Southern Pacific Co. v. Spring Valley Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
- Coulter v. Sausalito Bay Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.