Garbarino v. Noce
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mariposa County. J. J. Trabucco, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
The defendants appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
The case involves the respective rights of the three parties in the waters of a stream known as Maxwell Creek and in a certain ditch by which water is diverted therefrom. Bach party owns a small parcel of land abutting upon the creek in the outlying limits of Coulterville. Noce’s land is the upper parcel, Cammissiona’s is the next, and that of Garbarino is the lowest upon the stream. The part of Noce’s land for which the water is claimed lies on the northerly side of the creek. The lands of Cammissiona and Garbarino are on the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Drury v. Midland RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Cannon v. StockmonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Gray v. WalkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Rogers v. MillerWashington Supreme Court · 1895
- Randall v. ChaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- People v. Ocean Shore Railroad, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1948
- City of Santa Maria v. AdamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Strong v. StrongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Zimmer v. DykstraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Ames v. Empire Star Mines Co., Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1941
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.