Faulkner v. Rondoni
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Nevada County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
This is an action to quiet title to a certain ditch and water right; to recover damages for the diversion of water therefrom, and for an injunction restraining defendants from such diversion.
Plaintiff had a decree establishing his title to the ditch extending from his ranch, therein described, to a *141certain stream known as South Wolf creek, and his prior right at all times to divert from said South Wolf creek, and to conduct the same through said ditch, water to the extent of thirty-one (31) inches, measured under a six-inch pressure; that the rights of defendants in and to the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Cave v. CraftsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
- Alta Land & Water Co. v. HancockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Anaheim Water Co. v. Semi-Tropic Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1883
- Yankee Jim's Union Water Co. v. CraryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- People v. DyeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- City of Pasadena v. City of AlhambraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Rancho Santa Margarita v. VailCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Gird v. BennettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- City of San Bernardino v. City of RiversideCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Union Mill & Mining Co. v. DangbergU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1897
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.