Legal Opinion

Rianda v. Watsonville Water & Light Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided December 9, 1907No. S.F. No. 4318PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Wyckoff & Gardner, and Charles A. Shurtleff, for Appellants.

1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.

This appeal is prosecuted by the defendants from a judgment in favor of plaintiff and from an order denying their motion for a new trial.

The action was brought to quiet title to certain riparian and other water-rights in Santa Cruz County, and to set aside two certain deeds made by plaintiff in this action to the defendants Smith and Montague on the ground of fraud in their procurement.

Referring generally to the pleadings, it is alleged in the complaint that Carmen A. de McKinlay died on October 6, 1901, and that plaintiff was duly appointed and qualified as administratrix of her estate; that…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Collins v. O'LavertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pettengill v. BlackmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Wolff v. CloyneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Mitchell v. McDonaldMontana Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Hudson v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Hudson v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API