Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Stevinson Water District v. Roduner

California Supreme Court

Decided October 27, 1950No. Sac. 6020; Sac. 6021PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.

These are appeals from judgments entered in two consolidated actions wherein defendants were permanently enjoined from diverting certain “foreign water” flowing in Owens Creek in Merced County.

Plaintiff Stevinson Water District is a public corporation organized under the provisions of the California Water District Act (Stats. 1913, p. 815, 3 Deering’s Gen. Laws, Act 9125) and embraces 8,000 acres of irrigable land in Merced and Stanislaus Counties. It owns the physical properties and franchises leased and used by plaintiff East Side Canal & Irrigation Company, a public utility engaged in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Peabody v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. City of Pasadena v. City of AlhambraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Bloss v. RahillyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Crane v. StevinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Platner v. VincentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Rank v. (Krug) United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1956
  2. Orange Cnty. Water Dist. v. Sabic Innovative Plastics United States, LLC, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  3. Strode v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  4. United States v. Fallbrook Public Utility Dist.District Court, S.D. California · 1952
  5. United States v. Fallbrook Public Utility Dist.District Court, S.D. California · 1952

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API