Gould v. Eaton
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County. W. B. Cope, Judge. The main facts are stated in the opinion of the court rendered upon the former appeal by plaintiff. (Gould v. Eaton, 111 Cal. 639, 641-45; 52 Am. St. Rep. 201.) Further facts appear in the opinion of the court rendered upon this appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The facts involved in the judgment herein are set forth in the opinion given upon an appeal therefrom by the plaintiff. (Gould v. Eaton, 111 Cal. 639; 52 Am. St. Rep. 201.) The present appeal is by the defendants from that portion of the judgment which enjoins them from diverting to lands not riparian to the creek any of the waters naturally flowing in its channel, and from preventing or interfering with the flow directly back into the stream from the mouth of the tunnel constructed by them of one and forty-three hundredths inches of water, measured under a four-inch pressure. The court found…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gould v. EatonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Moore v. Clear Lake Water WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Gould v. StaffordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Stanford v. FeltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Yocco v. ConroyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by25 opinions
- Rancho Santa Margarita v. VailCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Montecito Valley Water Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Greeson v. Imperial Irr. Dist.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932
- Jones v. ConnOregon Supreme Court · 1901
- Morris v. BeanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Montana · 1906
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.