Northern Light & Power Co. v. Stacher
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Shasta County. Charles M. Head, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.]
OPINION ON REHEARING.
We still adhere to the conclusions reached in the former opinion for the reasons there given.
We invited further consideration of two questions — first, Does the complaint state sufficient facts upon the issue of the necessity for the taking? and, second, Does the statute authorize the taking of water for electric power, light and heat purposes?
In addition to what is said in the former opinion, it may not be amiss to make some further…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- City of Pasadena v. StimsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Spring Valley Water Works v. DrinkhouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Central Pacific Ry. Co. v. FeldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- St. Helena Water Co. v. ForbesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Walker v. Shasta Power Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1908
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- City of Oakland v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1942
- San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. StevinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Linggi v. GarovottiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Stratford Irrigation District v. Empire Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
- Vallejo & Northern Railroad v. Home Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.