Legal Opinion

Fuller v. Azusa Irrigating Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided December 29, 1902No. L.A. No. 992PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

CHIPMAN, C.

The action is to restrain defendants from interfering with a water-pipe attached by plaintiffs to the water-ditch of defendant corporation, to supply water for domestic purposes. The court gave judgment for defendants, from which and from the order denying their motion for a new trial plaintiffs appeal. The court made twenty-eight separate findings of fact, most of which are unchallenged. It appears from these findings,—1. That prior to 1885 persons known as “old users” had appropriated from the San Gabriel River, in Los Angeles County, a large quantity of water for the irrigation…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Thayer v. California Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
  2. City of Glendale v. Crescenta Mutual Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955
  3. Gasser v. Garden Water Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Simpson's Colony Reclamation Canal Co. v. HutzlerNevada Supreme Court · 1979

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API