Van Bibber v. Hilton
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Modoc County. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Foote, C.
This is an action to restrain the defendants from diverting the waters of a stream in the county of Modoc. The stream flows through the lands of both the plaintiff and the defendants, and they are all riparian proprietors, the defendants’ land lying on the stream above that of the plaintiff.
*586It appears by the findings that the amount of water carried by the stream is about 250 inches under a four-inch pressure, and that of such amount of water the defendants were the proprietors by prior appropriation of 25 inches. The court also found that the defendants had, by means of dams…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Heilbron v. 76 Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by9 opinions
- People v. MaughsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Tide Water Associated Oil Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Turner v. the James Canal Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Haro v. Southern Pacific RailroadCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Liebhauser v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.