Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hudson v. West

California Supreme Court

Decided February 7, 1957No. Sac. 6438Published

Hughes, Maul & Fogerty and Geoffrey A Hughes for Respondents.

1ConcurrenceCarter, J.

I concur in the judgment of affirmance and in the reasoning in the majority opinion with the exception of the inference which might be drawn therefrom that a *832riparian right may be pleaded by simply alleging the ownership of land situated on a natural stream or watercourse and the ownership of a water right from said stream as being appurtenant to said land. It is my opinion that such a pleading would not be sufficient to raise an issue of riparian ownership or the existence of a riparian right. (See Riverside Water Co. v. Gage, 89 Cal. 410, 420 [26 P. 889] ; Wutchumna Water Co. v. Pogue, 151…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. City of Pasadena v. City of AlhambraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Miller & Lux v. Madera Canal & Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Herminghaus v. Southern California Edison Co.California Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Rancho Santa Margarita v. VailCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

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

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

Powered by the Exa API