Bathgate

Bathgate v. Irvine

Good Law
126 Cal. 135·1899 Cal. LEXIS 688·58 P. 442
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 1899L.A. No. 362.California5,119 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

—Action to quiet the title of plaintiffs, two hundred and seventy-five in number, to the waters of Santiago creek in Orange county, and for an injunction.

Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment, from the order denying motion for new trial, and from certain parts of the order dis allowing plaintiffs’ cost. Defendant appeals from certain parts of this latter order.

Santiago creek takes its rise in high mountain elevations on government land; it flows hy a natural, well-defined channel through and over defendant’s land, comprising about forty-eight thousand acres; thence over and through a tract of land, about one mile in width, owned by persons not mad'é parties to the suit; thence enters and flows .over and through plaintiffs’ lands, comprising in all about two thousand acres. The court found that the predecessors in interest of plaintiffs, about the year 1872, diverted and appropriated all the waters of this creek, about one mile below defendant’s land, and used the same upon their said lands for irrigation and domestic purposes, and that said waters have been so used on plaintiffs’ lands continuously for the past twenty-one years; that plaintiffs have expended large sums of money…

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.