San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. Worswick
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, C. J.
In each of the cases above entitled the plaintiff appeals from the judgment. The two eases were begun separately and separate pleadings, findings, and judgment were filed and made in each case. They were, however, tried together in the court below and the two cases are submitted, so far as the plaintiffs are concerned, upon the same briefs. As the questions are, for the most part, identical, they may be treated together.
In case No. 3119, that of the San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Company Incorporated, the complaint alleges that, under an appropriation and diversion of the waters…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Katz v. WalkinshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Wright v. RoseberrySupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- French v. FyanSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Hough v. PorterOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- Michigan Land & Lumber Co. v. RustSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- California Oregon Power Co. v. Beaver Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Peabody v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Pabst v. FinmandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Rank v. (Krug) United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1956
- United States v. Fallbrook Public Utility DistrictDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1958
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.