Gallaher v. Montecito Valley Water Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtDe Haven, J.
The plaintiff is an owner of land bordering on the Cold Spring branch of Montecito creek, and this action was brought for the purpose of restraining the defendant from diverting the waters of sáid stream.
*243The defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of this state for the purpose of supplying water to the inhabitants of a portion of Santa Barbara county, and in its answer alleged that prior to January 14, 1888, John Coe and John W. Coe had acquired a prescriptive right to divert the waters of the Cold Spring branch of Montecito creek to the extent of defendant’s diversion, and were…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Alhambra Addition Water Co. v. RichardsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Anaheim Water Co. v. Semi-Tropic Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1883
- Yankee Jim's Union Water Co. v. CraryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Lakeside Ditch Co. v. CraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Ramelli v. IrishCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by13 opinions
- Montecito Valley Water Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Orange County Water District v. City of RiversideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- California Pastoral & Agriculture Co. v. Madera Canal & Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Pyramid Land & Stock Co. v. ScottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Arroyo Ditch & Water Co. v. BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.