Mott

Mott v. Ewing

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 920·90 Cal. 231·27 P. 194
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 16, 1891No. 13873California1,268 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

— This is an action to restrain, by injunction, the diversion from the plaintiff’s lands, by the defendants, of the waters of a certain natural stream, the flow of which over and across her lands as a riparian proprietor, as also the beneficial use thereof for irrigation purposes as a prior appropriator, are claimed by the plaintiff through superior right..

The defendants separately demurred to the complaint; their demurrers were overruled; they then answered at great length. A trial being had, judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, from which this appeal is taken on the judgment roll.

There are two main grounds upon which the defendants rely for a reversal of the judgment, as appears by their reply brief: 1. That the court has failed to find upon all the material issues raised by the pleadings; 2. That the findings, as made, do not support the judgment.

Under the first head, they assert that the amended ' complaint alleges, among other things, “and that plaintiff’s rights as such riparian owner were acquired long prior, and are superior to any right or claim of right of the defendants, or either of them, to the waters of said stream; that if said defendants continue, as by…

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.