From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matthiessen v. Montecito County Water District

Supreme Court of California
Apr 3, 1933
217 Cal. 788 (Cal. 1933)

Opinion

Docket No. L.A. 12832.

April 3, 1933.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County. Frank C. Collier, Judge. Affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

James F. Peck, Charles F. Blackstock and Elizabeth M. Maxwell for Appellants.

William P. Hubbard, as Amicus Curiae on Behalf of Appellants.

J.F. Goux, City Attorney, Heaney, Price Postel and W.G. Irving for Respondent.


THE COURT.

[1] The appeal in this case involves the same questions presented in the case of Gin S. Chow v. City of Santa Barbara, (L.A. No. 12834) ante, p. 673 [ 22 P.2d 5], this day decided, and by stipulation was submitted on the same briefs filed in that case. On the authority of that case the judgment herein is affirmed.

Preston, J., dissented.

Rehearing denied.

Preston, J., dissented.


Summaries of

Matthiessen v. Montecito County Water District

Supreme Court of California
Apr 3, 1933
217 Cal. 788 (Cal. 1933)
Case details for

Matthiessen v. Montecito County Water District

Case Details

Full title:F.W. MATTHIESSEN et al., Appellants, v. MONTECITO COUNTY WATER DISTRICT (a…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Apr 3, 1933

Citations

217 Cal. 788 (Cal. 1933)
22 P.2d 19

Citing Cases

Rank v. United States

It necessarily follows that what is surplus, excess or unappropriated water, or what is a waste of water,…