Haight v. Costanich
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Shasta County. James G. Estoy, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtLennon, J.
Plaintiff and defendant, who are the owners of adjoining tracts of land in Shasta County, seek in this action an adjudication of their respective rights in and to the waters of a creek, known as the North Fork of Richardson Creek, to which defendant’s land is riparian. In 1885, plaintiff’s predecessor in interest made entry of plaintiff’s land, which was then part of the public lands of the United States, in the United States land office, obtaining a patent in 1895. Prior to making entry of his land, the predecessor of plaintiff constructed a ditch which had at that time, and still has, a…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Jennison v. KirkSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Sturr v. BeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Leavitt v. Lassen Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Duckworth v. Watsonville Water & Light Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
- De Necochea v. CurtisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Tulare Irrigation District v. Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Casitas Municipal Water District v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013
- Pabst v. FinmandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- City of San Diego v. Cuyamaca Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
- Wyoming Hereford Ranch v. Hammond Packing Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1925
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.