Legal Opinion

Burnett v. Whitesides

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1860PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from the Tenth District. For case, see opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.

Baldwin, J. concurring.

The plaintiff is the owner of a ditch, constructed and used to divert water from Dry creek, in Yuba county, for mining purposes. The defendants are the owners of a ditch used by them to divert water from the same stream for the same purposes. The rights of the plaintiff are prior and paramount to those of the defendants. The action is for damages for diverting the water, and for an injunction. The plaintiff obtained a verdict and judgment, and the defendants moved for a new trial, which was refused. The appeal is from the judgment, and the order refusing a new trial.

The…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Bates v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Watson v. LawsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Graham v. GrahamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Miller v. WheelerWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Malad Valley Irrigating Co. v. CampbellIdaho Supreme Court · 1888

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API