Legal Opinion
Spencer v. Taylor Creek Ditch Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 5, 1912No. 1,918PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMorrow, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as .above).
The first objection urged against the complaint in intervention is that while the allegations are reasonably full .and explicit in alleging an enhancement in value of the Henry creek ditch, and the preservation of that particular water right by the indebtedness incurred for the labor and supplies used in its construction, there is nothing by way -of allegation connecting that work with the mortgaged property as a whole, or indicating what, if any, mining claims were rendered more valuable thereby, or what, if any, of the other ditches or water rights…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fosdick v. SchallSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Kneeland v. American Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Wood v. Guarantee Trust and Safe Deposit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Gregg v. Metropolitan Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Atlantic Trust Co. v. Woodbridge Canal & Irrigation Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dudley v. MealeyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Robinson v. DickeyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1929
- Crane Co. v. Fidelity Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1916
- MacGregor v. Johnson-Cowdin-Emmerich, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- American Engineering Co. v. Metropolitan By-Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.