Blankenship v. Whaley
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Wheaton A. Gray, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
By his action plaintiff seeks an injunction restraining defendants from interfering with him in the use of a certain ditch upon the lands of defendants. Plaintiff avers that he “constructed a certain irrigating ditch” upon lands which were at the time the lands of one R. G. Rogers, under an agreement with Rogers that he, plaintiff, was to have the perpetual right to the use of the ditch for the purpose of conducting water to his lands, together with the right at all times to enter upon the premises of Rogers to repair the ditch and *302keep it in proper condition. He alleged that for ten years…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Flickinger v. ShawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Hayes v. FineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Love v. BerryTexas Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by12 opinions
- Texas Co. v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Nielson v. SandbergUtah Supreme Court · 1943
- Stepp v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Irrigated Valleys Land Co. v. AltmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Churchill v. RussellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.