Daily Los Angeles herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1876-1884, 1881-06-19
Eos Aaselrs Armla.


Supreme Court Decision
IN BANK.
Filled June IA, lsSi.]
ANAsTACIo FELIZ EFT AL. No
VS.. zoo
TIE CITY OF Los ANGELES "o'N'
The appeal in this case has been
presented to the Court, on the judg-
mont roll. This suit was brought
BY the PLAINTIFF against the city of
Los Angeles, and the contest re-
lAtes to the right to the use of the
waters of the Los Angeles river,
the PLAINTIFF claiming the right to
use the same under an apprOpria-
ton alleged to have been made by
them or their grantors In the year
1914, and the defendant claiming
the exclusive right to use the same
for . period extending as far back
~ the year 1881. On the trial in
the Court below, jud gmeut passed
In favor of the PLAINTIFF, and an In
Junction was ordered against the
city and its agents, ETC., as prayed
for In the complaint.
The plaintiffs are the owners of
certain tracts of land described in
their complaint, which are bounded
on the easterly side by the Los An
eeles River, aud since the year
1874 they have used the waters of
said river, through certain bitches
constructed by them or their grant
ors, for the purpose OF irrigating
their said lands. In the mouth of
May, 1879, the water in said river
lin consequence of the use and di-
version thereof by plaintiffs) be.
came so reduced and diminished in
quantity that q sufficient quantity
thereof did not flow down the river
below PLAINTIFF bitches, to supply
the wants of the city, and thereupon
the said city, by its officers and
agents, entered upon said bitches
ct their heads, and returned the
water that was flowing through the
same to the bed Of the river, and
the city has ever since held posses.
zion OF said bitches, and prevented
the waters Of the river from flowing
therein, and has prevented the
PLAINTIFF from using the waters OF
said river.
The loss of the water is the griev.
ance complained of, and, after find
ing that the plaintiffs were entitled,
~ riparian owners, to divert rea-
sonable amount of the waters of the
river for irrigation and domestic
use, the Court "ordered, adjudged
and decreed, that the defendant,
the City of Los Angeles, Its sue
cessors, agents, officers and attor-
neys, are perpetually epjonied and
restrained from In any wise inter.
fering with the ditch, or in any
wise hindering or Interfering with
the said plaintiffs, or either OF
them, in their appropriation of a
reasonable quantity OF the waters
of the aforesaid river, and using the
same upon their said respective
parcels Of land for the purposes oil
Irrigation and domestic uses." The
following are the findings upon
which the above decree was
founded:
"First-That in the year of 1881,
pursuant to the laws of Spain aud
the rules and regulations providing
for the government of the prov.
inces of California, Los Angeles was
duly formed into q pueblo and be.
came entitled TO all the rights Of n
pueblo according to said laws,
rules and regulations and all its
rights as such pueblo since then
were duly recognized and allowed
by the Spanish and Mexican Gov.
ernments during their respective
occupations and control of the
same, and also by the respective
provincial aud departmental au.
thoRities of California.
"Second-That the river of Los
Angeles rises several miles above
the former pueblo of Los Angeles,
and runs down through said pue.
bio, and during the occupation and
control of said pueblo by the Next
can Government, the municipal
authorities at all times exercised
control of and claimed the exclus.
i've right to use the waters of said
river and all thereof, which right
was duly recognized, acknowledged
and allowed by the owners OF the
land at the source and bordering
on said river, including the grant.
ors Of the plaintiffs, and that ever
since the occupation and control of
said pueblo by the Government OF
the United States, and of the State
Of California the municipal author
lilies OF what is now the city of Los
Angeles, have exercised the same
control and claimed the same
rights In regard to the waters OF
said river as was previously done
by the authorities of said pueblo,
except within the last two or three
years, when the right of said city
to said waters has been disputed
by the PLAINTIFF and others, and u
right claimed by them to use said
waters; that the municipal au.
thorities of said pueblo ami said
city exercised control of said wa.
ters and claimed the exclusive
right to their use as aforesaid, fol
the purpose of irrigating the lands
of said pueblo and city, and for the
domestic use of the inhabitants
thereof.
"Fifth-That the water of said
river IL necessary for the irrigation
of the land within said city, and
90 confirmed as aforesaid, and also
for the domestic use OF its iDhabit.
ants, but until within the last two
or thrOo vaara all of said water has
not been required in said city. Fol
the last few years, during the irri-
eating season, all of said waters, as
they naturally flow in said river,
have not been sufficient for the ir-
rigatien Of the irrigable portion OF
said lands and the domestic use OF
said inhabitants; and said city. at
an expense OF more than 800, 900,
has constructed reservoirs to hus-
band and save said waters for uses
in said city; that a large portion of
the irrigable lands of said city are