Roseberry

Roseberry v. Clark

Caution
1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 235·23 Cal. App. 549·138 P. 923
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 20, 1913Civ. No. 1122.California4,174 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

This is an action to restrain defendant from interfering with plaintiff’s use of certain water. The cause was tried by the court and plaintiff had judgment perpetually enjoining defendant from diverting or otherwise obstructing plaintiff in the use of said water. Defendant appeals from the judgment by the alternative method.

It is alleged in the complaint that for more than twenty years prior to the commencement of the action (complaint filed June 28, 1911), “plaintiff was and now is the owner of the west % and the west % of the southeast 14 of section 20, township 39 north, range 9 east, in Modoc County; that, upon the southwest % of the southwest 14 of section 21, and the northwest 14 of the northwest 14 of section 28, said township, there are several springs whose waters flow to a point in the northeasterly part of the northeast % of the northeast 14 of section 29, said township, and there unite and flow between well-defined banks in a well-defined channel and would naturally thus flow in a southwesterly direction into what is known as Ash Creek”; that while such owner, and more than twenty years before the commencement of the action, plaintiff ‘ ‘ entered upon the northeast…

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.