Pomona Land & Water Co. v. San Antonio Water Co.
California Supreme Court
CROSS-APPEALS from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. M. T. Allen, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Otis, Gregg & Surr, and H. W. O'Melveny, for Defendants, Appellants, and Respondents. A. P. Nichols, J. S. Chapman, and Stephens & Stephens, for Plaintiffs, Respondents, and Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This is an action in form for an injunction to restrain the defendants from their alleged unlawful diversion of the waters of the San Antonio Creek. In its essence the action is to determine the conflicting claims of plaintiffs and of defendants to certain of these waters. The Pomona Land and Water Company represents the users of water to the west of San Antonio Creek—the “Pomona people.” The San Antonio Water Company represents and supplies the lands and people to the east side of the creek— the “Ontario people.” At a fixed point upon the stream a dam had been erected, and at this dam the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Cole v. . HughesNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Butte Canal & Ditch Co. v. VaughnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. RowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Platte Valley Irrigation Co. v. Buckers Irrigation, Milling & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1898
- Wiggins v. Muscupiabe Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Santa Maria v. AdamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Reno v. RichardsIdaho Supreme Court · 1918
- Relovich v. StuartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Southern Pacific Pipe Lines, Inc. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
- Simons v. MunchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.