Bent

Bent v. Second Extension Water Co.

Good Law
1921 Cal. App. LEXIS 709·51 Cal. App. 648·197 P. 657
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 3, 1921Civ. No. 2226.California2,035 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

The appeal is on the judgment-roll. The decree of the court required defendant Alpaugh Irrigation District, “upon payment of reasonable cost of furnishing and delivering the same to furnish and deliver to plaintiff, or his successors, upon said land mentioned, and described in the complaint in this action, for irrigation purposes from the water supply and water system formerly owned by said Second Extension Water Company” a certain quantity of water designated and described therein; it also adjudged that said quantity of water is appurtenant to all the real property described in the complaint and belonging to plaintiff, and ordered and directed that plaintiff recover from said defendant the sum of $1,625.60 for failure and neglect to furnish water on said land for irrigation purposes during the irrigation season of 1917.

The defendant, Second Extension Water Company, a mutual water corporation, was incorporated in January, 1906, in accordance with the provision of section 324 of the Civil Code. The by-laws provided that the water should be supplied only to the owners of the stock, and that such stock should be appurtenant to certain lands described in the certificates issued…

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.