Legal Opinion

Fitzell v. Leaky

California Supreme Court

Decided June 7, 1887No. 11424PublishedCited by 30 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Lassen County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcKinstry, J.

The action is to enjoin the defendant from selling, as sheriff, one fourth of a water ditch, and of the water flowing through it, claimed by plaintiff, as appurtenant to and part of his homestead. The court below decreed an injunction.

At the trial the defendant introduced in evidence the judgment roll in an action wherein one G. F. Kelly was plaintiff and the plaintiff herein was defendant. That action was brought by the plaintiff to quiet his title to a tract of four and one half acres of land, described by metes and bounds, so as to include the land occupied by a ditch, in part the ditch…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Sparks v. HessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. City of San Francisco v. CalderwoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  3. McCracken v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Lewis v. CovillaudCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
  5. Pico v. ColimasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. Smith v. BanghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. In Re DudleyDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1947
  3. Simonson v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Taylor v. MadiganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  5. Selna v. SelnaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

25 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