Legal Opinion

Willits Water Etc. Co. v. Landrum

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 10, 1918No. Civ. No. 1763PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] The appeal is by the plaintiff from a judgment in favor of the defendant decreeing that he was entitled to divert and devote to beneficial use the natural flow of a stream of water known as "Southard" Creek, in Mendocino County, to the extent of two and one-half miner's inches measured under a four-inch pressure, and also that he was the owner of a certain flume and ditch and a right of way across plaintiff's land for a diverting system for the appropriation of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Gurnsey v. Northern California Power Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Southern Pacific Co. v. Spring Valley Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Burr v. MacLay Rancho Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Gurnsey v. Antelope Creek & Red Bluff Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1907
  5. Riverside Water Co. v. SargentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ward v. City of MonroviaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Village of Fairview v. Franklin Maple Creek Pioneer Irrigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1938
  3. County of Tuolumne v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. De La Cuesta v. BazziCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API