Legal Opinion

Directors of Fallbrook Irrigation District v. Abila

California Supreme Court

Decided March 11, 1895No. 19368PublishedCited by 27 opinions

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County granting a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.

This is an action brought by the directors of an alleged irrigation district to have the court approve and confirm all the proceedings of said district, including the form of certain proposed bonds, in accordance with the provision for such an action to be found in the “ confirmation act,” which is supplemental to the statute generally known as the “ Wright act.” The court below rendered judgment for the plaintiffs, but on motion of defendant, Abila, who was a landowner in the district, a new trial was granted, and plaintiffs appeal from the said order granting the new trial.

The motion for a…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Van Maren v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. Board of Directors of Modesto Irrigation District v. TregeaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Mulligan v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Schuyler v. BroughtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  5. Manly v. HowlettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Spreckels v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  2. City of Los Angeles v. San Pedro Boat WorksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  3. In re Organization & of the Bonds of the Central Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  4. In Re Estate of MoffittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Bernhard v. WallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921

22 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