Bent v. Second Extension Water Co.
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The appeal is on the judgment-roll. The decree of the court required defendant Alpaugh Irrigation District, “upon payment of reasonable cost of furnishing and delivering the same to furnish and deliver to plaintiff, or his successors, upon said land mentioned, and described in the complaint in this action, for irrigation purposes from the water supply and water system formerly owned by said Second Extension Water Company” a certain quantity of water designated and described therein; it also adjudged that said quantity of water is appurtenant to all the real property described in the complaint…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- City of S. Pasadena v. Pasadena Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
- Hobbs v. Tom Reed Gold Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
- Kohl v. LilienthalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Klauber v. San Diego St.-Car Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
- Wright v. Oroville Gold, Silver, & Copper Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1870
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Jacobucci v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1975
- Stratford Irrigation District v. Empire Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
- De Boni Corp. v. Del Norte Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Palo Verde Land & Water Co. v. EdwardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Stratford Irrigation District v. Empire Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1943
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.