Mt. Shasta Power Corp. v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
This is an application for a writ of mandate to compel the respondent judge to settle a proposed bill of exceptions.
On June 4, 1923, Anna McArthur commenced an action in Shasta County (No. 6319), against the petitioner corporation, alleging that her lands situated on Pit River above the confluence of Pit River and Fall River were riparian to Pall River as well as to Pit River in the summer-time; and that the corporation was unlawfully diverting from her lands the waters of Pall River for electric power purposes. She sought an injunction to restrain the corporation from continuing…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Fall River Valley Irrigation District v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1927
- Keating v. KeatingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Crum v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1931
- Curtin v. IngleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Albaugh v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1931
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Rinaldo v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1932
- McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1932
- McArthur v. Mt. Shasta Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1932
- Mt. Shasta Power Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.