Wyandotte Orchards, Inc. v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District

*983 Opinion

Plaintiff Wyandotte Orchards, Inc., brought this declaratory relief action against the Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District, claiming contractual entitlement to one-quarter of a miner’s inch of water annually for each acre of its 166’/a-acre parcel. The parcel lies outside the district boundaries. The district contended that plaintiff was entitled to one-quarter inch for each of the 146 acres which plaintiff had developed by December 1932, with no entitlement for the 20Vi acres which plaintiff had not developed by that date. The trial court sustained plaintiff’s claim to water calculated by the measure of the entire 166 lA acre parcel.

The underlying transactions giving rise to the suit occurred between 1912 and 1922. Some of them have been litigated earlier. (See Henderson v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1929) 207 Cal. 215 [ 277 P. 487 ]; Dankert v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1930) 211 Cal. 87 [ 293 P. 785 ]; Henderson v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1931) 213 Cal. 514 [ 2 P.2d 803 ]; Rutherford v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1932) 215 Cal. 124 [ 8 P.2d 836 ]; Rutherford v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1932) 218 Cal. 242 [ 22 P.2d 505 ].)

For a…

I dissent.

Where “present water users” are by definition owners of “land supplied with water,” it is axiomatic that they are not owners of “land not supplied with water.” Yet that is precisely what the majority has held. Land is not “supplied” with water when no water is physically deposited upon or within it; and this simple reality does not change because such land is owned by one who also owns adjoining land which is supplied with water.

During the years 1918, 1919, and 1920, South Feather was unable to meet its contractual commitments to its consumers and was ordered by the Railroad Commission (now Public Utilities Commission) not to deliver water to lands other than those then served, and not to extend service to new consumers until an adequate supply of water was available. During approximately the same period there were also certain lands in the Palermo system which were entitled to water from that company, but for various reasons had not yet received it.

Defendant was organized to serve the area in 1919, and thereafter negotiated the acquisition of the water rights and irrigation systems of Palermo and South Feather. The applications of the two companies for approval of…

Plaintiff Wyandotte Orchards, Inc., brought this declaratory relief action against the Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District, claiming contractual entitlement to one-quarter of a miner's inch of water annually for each acre of its 166 1/2-acre parcel. The parcel lies outside the district boundaries. The district contended that plaintiff was entitled to one-quarter inch for each of the 146 acres which plaintiff had developed by December 1932, with no entitlement for the 20 1/2 acres which plaintiff had not developed by that date. The trial court sustained plaintiff's claim to water calculated by the measure of the entire 166 1/2 acre parcel.

The underlying transactions giving rise to the suit occurred between 1912 and 1922. Some of them have been litigated earlier. (See Henderson v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1929) 207 Cal. 215 [ 277 P. 487 ]; Dankert v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1930) 211 Cal. 87 [ 293 P. 785 ]; Henderson v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1931) 213 Cal. 514 [ 2 P.2d 803 ]; Rutherford v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1932) 215 Cal. 124 [ 8 P.2d 836 ]; Rutherford v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irr. Dist. (1932) 218 Cal. 242 [ 22 P.2d 505…