Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. Perrin
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County and from an order refusing a new trial. H. Z. Austin, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
The plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of the defendants and also from an order denying its motion for a new trial. The judgment further provided that the defendant Lilo M. Perrin should recover of plaintiff the sum of five hundred dollars.
The plaintiff’s complaint contained four counts for the recovery of annual payments, amounting in the aggregate to $3,193.75, upon four separate water-right contracts executed by the plaintiff, all dated February 19, 1897, in each of which plaintiff agreed to furnish water from its canal for the irrigation of certain tracts of land belonging to the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. RowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Crow v. San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. DunbarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Southern Pacific Railroad v. AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Deacon v. BlodgetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Coughlin v. BlairCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Brown v. GrimesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Callender v. Crossfield Oil SyndicateMontana Supreme Court · 1929
- Chrisman v. Southern California Edison Co.California Court of Appeal · 1927
- Consolidated Irrigation District v. CrawshawCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.