Legal Opinion

Miller v. Bay Cities Water Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided February 4, 1910No. S.F. No. 4814PublishedCited by 52 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Garret W. McEnerney, Walter Rothchild, and John Garber, for Appellants.

1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.

Plaintiff, the owner of a tract of land in Santa Clara County upon which was planted an orchard of twenty-one acres of deciduous trees, brought this action against the defendant, a California corporation, organized for the purpose of furnishing water to cities and their inhabitants, and against certain of its officers, to enjoin the diversion by them of any waters of the Coyote River in said county; either those waters flowing on the surface of the bed of said river or flowing or percolating underneath it, or from diverting any of said waters to any extent.

As the basis of his right to an…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Katz v. WalkinshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Montecito Valley Water Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Verdugo Ca&209on Water Co. v. VerdugoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Gregory v. GregoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Hudson v. DaileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909

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

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. Tulare Irrigation District v. Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Peabody v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. City of Pasadena v. City of AlhambraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Gin S. Chow v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Joslin v. Marin Municipal Water DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967

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

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

Powered by the Exa API