Wood v. Etiwanda Water Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. W. B. Cope, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
HAYNES, C.
Plaintiffs are the owners, as tenants in common, of several parcels of land described in the complaint, through which a stream known as East Canyon creek flowed in its natural course.
The Etiwanda Water Company is a corporation, and for convenience will be treated as the sole defendant, inasmuch as the court found and decreed that the other defendant had no interest in the litigation, and no question is made upon that part of the judgment.
In the year 1883 the defendant diverted water from said stream upon one of the parcels of land now owned by plaintiffs, but which was then public…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- McLaughlin v. DohertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- McGuire v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Schurtz v. RomerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Thomas v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Smith v. DenniffMontana Supreme Court · 1900
- Simmons v. HanneSupreme Court of Florida · 1905
- Prentice v. McKayMontana Supreme Court · 1909
- Bell v. StaackeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. WorswickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.