Phœnix Water Co. v. Fletcher
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fifth Judicial District, Tuolumne County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the CourtCrocker, J.
This is an action to recover damages, and for an injunction to restrain the defendants, who are the owners of a sawmill on a stream, the waters of which the plaintiffs claim by prior appropriation for -mining purposes, from interfering with the regular flow of water to plaintiffs’ ditch, and from throwing sawdust and other refuse into the water, to the plaintiffs’ injury. Special issues were *485submitted to a jury, who returned the following special verdict: “ First. At what time did the plaintiffs’ grantors appropriate the waters of Sugar Pine Creek for mining purposes ? Answer : March, 1852.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Howell v. M'CoySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- Lewis v. SteinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- Hill v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
3Cited by8 opinions
- United States v. State Water Resources Control BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- Wright v. BestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Town of Antioch v. Williams Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Carson v. HayesOregon Supreme Court · 1901
- United States v. Gila Valley Irrigation DistrictDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.