Lillis v. Emigrant Ditch Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
Th plaintiffs brought this action against the defendant to obtain a judgment declaring that the defendant is not entitled to divert from the channel of Cole Slough any greater quantity of water than forty cubic feet per second, or to divert from said channel any water whatever, except at times when there is more than five hundred cubic feet of water per second passing down the channel, and by the head of defendant’s ditch; and that the defendant be perpetually enjoined from diverting any water from said channel, except at such times and in such an amount. In their complaint, the plaintiffs…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cromwell v. County of SacSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Hopkins v. LeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
- Stannard v. . HubbellNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- People Ex Rel. Reilly v. JohnsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
- Garwood v. GarwoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Helene Marceau Sidebotham v. W. L. Robison, Administrator of the Estate of Robert Sidebotham, Deceased, and Robert Sidebotham and James SidebothamCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- Willis v. WillisWyoming Supreme Court · 1935
- Crew v. PrattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Beronio v. Ventura County Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- McDonald v. McCoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.