Legal Opinion

Fogarty v. Fogarty

California Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 1900No. Sac. No. 685PublishedCited by 8 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, C.

The suit was brought to enjoin the defendant from diverting water flowing in a pipe to the land of the plaintiff, and to quiet plaintiff’s title to the same. The judgment was for the defendant, and the appeal is from an order denying a new trial.

The plaintiff is the owner of a piece of ground known as the Doyle place, which for many years has been supplied with water by means of an iron pipe conveying water thereto from a spring on a place known as the Thomas rancho, which is the. water in controversy; and one of the allegations of the complaint is “that the plaintiff and his…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Love v. WatkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
  2. Luco v. De ToroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Montecito Valley Water Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Morris v. BeanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Montana · 1906
  3. Rose v. MesmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Peixouto v. PeixoutoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  5. Kepfler v. KepflerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

3 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