Hesperia Land & Water Co. v. Rogers
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.
— Action to quiet title to a parcel of land situate in the county of San Bernardino. Defendant had judgment. Plaintiff moved for a new trial. His motion was denied, and he appeals from the judgment and order denying his motion.
The controversy turned on the adverse user of defendant,'for more than five years, of an irrigating ditch, constructed by him over plaintiff’s land.
The adverse user is made out by defendant, unless the contention of plaintiff that it was not continuous is maintainable.
And it is urged that the user by defendant was not continuous, for the reason that defendant only ran…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. CosnahanMississippi Supreme Court · 1913
3Cited by34 opinions
- Feldman Et Ux. v. Knapp Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1952
- Swan v. MunchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Strong v. BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Hays v. De AtleyMontana Supreme Court · 1923
- Stepp v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.