San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. Fresno Flume & Irrigation Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEALS from judgments of the Superior Court of Fresno ' County, and from orders refusing new trials. H. Z. Austin, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Houghton & Houghton, Frank H. Short, and Edward F. Treadwell, for Appellants. L. L. Cory, W. S. Goodfellow, and Goodfellow, Bells & Orrick, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
These appeals present the same questions and may, therefore, ,be considered and decided together. Stevenson Creek is a small stream tributary to the San Joaquin River. In dry seasons of the year its waters do not reach the latter. In its course through the mountains it flows into, through, and out of a flat tract of land, “a mountain meadow,” about eighty-five miles distant from plaintiffs’ lands. Defendant constructed a dam across the canon at the lower end of this mountain meadow impounding the rain, storm, and flood-waters of the adjacent hills and converting the mountain meadow into a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Miller & Lux v. Madera Canal & Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Miller v. Bay Cities Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
- Modoc Land & Live Stock Co. v. BoothCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Gould v. EatonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Motl v. BoydTexas Supreme Court · 1926
- Peabody v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Gin S. Chow v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Miller & Lux Inc. v. Enter. Canal & Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- Gallatin v. Corning Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.