Barnes

Barnes v. Hussa

Good Law
136 Cal. App. 4th 1358·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 232·2006 Daily Journal DAR 2246·39 Cal. Rptr. 3d 659·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1601
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 24, 2006C049163California5,526 words

Opinion

Opinion

Robie, J.

This case arises out of a dispute over a pipeline used by plaintiffs Rodney and Jan Barnes to divert water from south Deep Creek in Modoc County for use on their nearby ranch, which consists of two noncontiguous parcels known as the Street property and the Tyeryar property. On its way from the creek to the Street property, the pipeline crosses property owned by defendants John and Linda Hussa known as the Vawter property.

After the Bameses extended the pipeline to serve the Tyeryar property as well as the Street property, the Hussas attempted to revoke their permission for the pipeline to cross the Vawter property and tried to dig up the pipeline. The Bameses commenced this action to stop them. In response, the Hussas cross-complained against the Bameses, contending the Bameses were violat ing a 1934 court decree regarding the rights to the water from Deep Creek by using the pipeline to supply water to the Tyeryar property.

The trial court decided the Bameses have an irrevocable license to continue using the pipeline, the Bameses are not violating the 1934 decree by using the pipeline to convey water to the Tyeryar property, and the Hussas did not prove the Bameses’…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.