Nenzel v. Rochester Silver Corporation
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Estoppel doctrine between landlord and tenant does not preclude grantee showing his derivative title, nor prevent lessee from attacking validity of transfer from original landlord. 24 Cyc. 945, note 19.
In determining right to use of water, rule of estoppel does not prevail as to right of lessee to deny title of landlord. Rule applies to corporeal, not incorporeal hereditaments. General good of community is to be considered. No absolute title is acquired, merely right to use thereof. 22 R.C.L. 48; 1 Wiel on Water Rights, 585; Swift v. Goodrich, 11 P. 561; 1 Washburn Real Property, 310.
Leases…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hawkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Garson v. Steamboat Canal Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1919
- Evans v. LeeNevada Supreme Court · 1877
- Welder v. McCombCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1895
- Swift v. GoodrichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Nenzel v. Rochester Silver CorporationNevada Supreme Court · 1927
- In Re C & P Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1945