Stocker v. Kirtley
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Lemhi County. The court erred in admitting the judgment-roll in the action of Michael Boyle, Thomas Boyle and Murray Williams v„ Thomas McGarvey and others. It is an elementary principle of law that a judgment can have no binding force upon anyone a stranger to the action.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Lemhi County. The court erred in admitting the judgment-roll in the action of Michael Boyle, Thomas Boyle and Murray Williams v„ Thomas McGarvey and others. It is an elementary principle of law that a judgment can have no binding force upon anyone a stranger to the action. (2 Black on Judgments, see. 600.) The evidence having shown clearly that the company used all ,the .water, it was competent to prove the declarations of the users under a claim of ownership by adverse user. These declarations would be the strongest possible evidence tending to* prove adverse…
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
— This is an action to enjoin the defendant (who is appellant here) from running placer mining debris, consisting of rock, sand, gravel, and sediment, into plaintiff’s irri*798gating ditch and upon his land, and for damages. The complaint specifically prays for $400 damages for a perpetual injunction, and “for such other proper and equitable relief as to the court shall seem meet, and for costs of suit.” Among other allegations, the complaint alleges ownership in the plaintiff of a certain water right, consisting of one hundred and forty inches,, of the water of hartley creek, but no specific…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cited by12 opinions
- Mays v. District Court ex rel. Butte CountyIdaho Supreme Court · 1921
- Wills v. MorrisMontana Supreme Court · 1935
- Swann v. Sweetwater Irrigation & Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Kite v. EckleyIdaho Supreme Court · 1929
- In Re Appeal From the Department of ReclamationIdaho Supreme Court · 1931
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.