Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Reclamation Dist. No. 70 v. Blackmer 159 Cal. 801

← Cases

Reclamation Dist. No. 70 v. Blackmer

159 Cal. 801 Court Department Two. Decision date 1911-01-10 Docket Sac. No. 1785 English

Contents

Majority

p. 801
[Sac. No. 1785.
Department Two.
January 10, 1911.]
RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. WESLEY BLACKMER et al., Appellants. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. J. W. BROWNING et al., Appellants. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. J. W. SMITH et al., Appellants. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. C. R. WEIS et al., Appellants. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. ELIZABETH WINSHIP, Appellant. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. J. W. SMITH et al., Appellants. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. OLIVER E. WINSHIP et al., Appellants. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. HENRY WILDER et al., Appellants.
[Sac. No. 1786.
[Sac. No. 1787.
[Sac. No. 1788.
[Sac. No. 1789.
[Sac. No. 1790.
[Sac. No. 1791.
[Sac. No. 1792.
p. 802
RECLAMATION DISTRICT No. 70, Respondent, v. CHARLES HAVENS, Appellant. RECLAMATION DISTRICT NO. 70, Respondent, v. HENRY SILLS et al., Appellants.
[Sac. No. 1793.
Department Two.
January 10, 1911.]
[Sac. No. 1794.

Headnote

Declamation Districts.—Assessment.—Judgments and orders in each of the above cases- are reversed on the authority of Declamation District No. 70, v. Birks, ante, p. 233.
APPEALS from judgments of the Superior Court of Sutter County. K. S. Mahon, Judge.
The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion in Reclamation District No. 70 v. Birks, ante, p. 233.
Arthur C. Huston, for Appellants.
A. H. Hewitt, and A. L. Shinn, for Respondent.

It having been stipulated that decisions in the above entitled cases should depend upon the decision in Reclamation District No. 70 v. John Birks (Sac. No. 1784), ante, p. 233, [ 113 Pac. 170 ], this day decided, and that such judgment of this court as might be made and given in the case of Reclamation District No. 70 v. John Birks (Sac. No. 1784), ante, p. 233, [ 113 Pac. 170 ], should also be given in the above entitled cases.

It is ordered as to the above entitled cases, and each of them, that the judgment and order appealed from be reversed.

Hearing in Bank of each of above entitled eases respectively denied.

Beatty, C. J., dissented from the respective orders denying a hearing in Bank of each of above entitled cases.