Crescent Canal Co. v. Montgomery
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.
The plaintiff is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of California for the purpose of diverting water from Kings River by means of a canal and conveying it to the owners of adjacent lands for irrigation, domestic uses, etc. The main canal, which is a large one, carrying two hundred and fifty cubic feet of water per second, was constructed prior to the year 1887, and, as first laid out, headed in the river at a point on section 5 of a certain township. In 1887 Poyser and Johns were owners of about four hundred and eighty acres in the adjoining section 4 of the same…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Crescent Canal Co. v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Southern California Railway Co. v. SlausonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
3Cited by17 opinions
- Gurnsey v. Northern California Power Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Miller & Lux Inc. v. Enter. Canal & Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- Barton v. Riverside Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Conaway v. Yolo Water & Power Co.California Supreme Court · 1928
- San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. WorswickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.