Legal Opinion

Lassen Irrigation Co. v. Long

California Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1909No. Sac. No. 1643PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

Plaintiff sued to recover from defendant the reasonable value of its services in furnishing water for the irrigation of defendant’s land, which value was alleged to be two dollars per acre. The services were rendered during the irrigation seasons of 1902, 1903, 1904, and 1905. Defendant answered, asserting that the value of the services did not exceed one dollar per acre, and denied that there was anything due from him to plaintiff. By cross-complaint he set up a contract made with the predecessor in interest of plaintiff, under which he contended that he had a permanent preferential right to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Leavitt v. Lassen Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
  2. South Boulder & R. C. Ditch Co. v. MarfellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1890
  3. De Prosse v. Royal Eagle Distilleries Co.California Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. McManus v. BendlageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  2. San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. Stanislaus CountyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1911
  3. Imperial Water Co. No. 5 v. HolabirdCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912
  4. Imperial Water Co. No. 5 v. HolabirdCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API