Miller & Lux v. Madera Canal & Irrigation Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] This appeal was originally heard in Department Two of this court, and the order appealed from was there affirmed. Upon application of the appellant, a rehearing was granted and the cause ordered to be heard in Bank.
The opinion filed by the Department fully and satisfactorily disposes of all the points arising on the appeal and is adopted as the opinion of the court in Bank. A few words may, however, be added to what has heretofore been said.
The rehearing was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Anaheim Union Water Co. v. Fuller.California Supreme Court · 1907
- Modoc Land & Live Stock Co. v. BoothCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Fifield v. Spring Valley Water WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
3Cited by102 opinions
- Continental Baking Co. v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Tulare Irrigation District v. Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Peabody v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Gin S. Chow v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- IT Corp. v. County of ImperialCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
97 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.