Leigh Co. v. Independent Ditch Co.

California Supreme Court

Leigh Co. v. Independent Ditch Co.

8 Cal. 323

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1857

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 8 Cal. 323 (Leigh Co. v. Independent Ditch Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Leigh Co. v. Independent Ditch Co., 8 Cal. 323 (Cal. 1857).

Pincite

Opinion

Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Terry, C. J., concurring.

The demurrer was properly overruled. The allegation that the plaintiffs were the owners, and in the possession of the mining-claims, was sufficient, without setting out any of the particulars of their title. And the ownership and possession of the claims, drew to them the right to the use of the water flowing in the natural channel of the stream. The diversion of the water was, therefore, an injury to the plaintiffs, for which they could sue. The principle involved in - this case, was expressly decided by this Court, in the case of Crandall and others v. [324]*324Woods and others, July, 1857. In that ease it was said: “ One who locates upon public lands with the view of appropriating them to his own use, becomes the absolute owner thereof, as against every one but the government, and is entitled to all the privileges and incidents which appertain to the soil, subject to the single exception of rights antecodentlv acquired.”

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Terry, C. J., concurring.

The demurrer was properly overruled. The allegation that the plaintiffs were the owners, and in the possession of the mining-claims, was sufficient, without setting out any of the particulars of their title. And the ownership and possession of the claims, drew to them the right to the use of the water flowing in the natural channel of the stream. The diversion of the water was, therefore, an injury to the plaintiffs, for which they could sue. The principle involved in - this case, was expressly decided by this Court, in the case of Crandall and others v. [324]*324Woods and others, July, 1857. In that ease it was said: “ One who locates upon public lands with the view of appropriating them to his own use, becomes the absolute owner thereof, as against every one but the government, and is entitled to all the privileges and incidents which appertain to the soil, subject to the single exception of rights antecodentlv acquired.”

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Cal. 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leigh-co-v-independent-ditch-co-cal-1857.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack