Majority
p. 453[S. F. No. 4376. In Bank. December 3, 1907.] FRESNO CANAL AND IRRIGATION COMPANY, Respondent, v. WILLIAM EDE COMPANY, Appellant.
Headnote
CONTRACT TO SUPPLY AND PAY FOB WATER—REFORMATION.—Fresno Canal and Irrigation Company v. Bart, ante, p. 450, followed and approved.APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County and from an order refusing a new trial. H. Z. Austin, Judge.
The facts in this case were similar to those in the ease of Fresno Canal and Irrigation Company v. Hart, ante, p. 450.
J. C. Bates, and William Ede, for Appellant.
p. 454
Frank H. Short, and F. E. Cook, for Respondent.
This action is in all respects like the action of Fresno Canal and Irrigation Company, plaintiff and respondent, v. Marcus Hart et al., defendants and appellants, No. 4372, ante, p. 450, [ 92 Pac. 1010 ], this day decided. The defendant was the successor in interest to certain lands originally owned by Hart and affected by the water contracts in suit. • The cause has been submitted to follow the determination in the Hart case, and for the reasons there given the judgment and order are reversed and the cause remanded.