TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Van Camp v. Breyer

JAMES H. VAN CAMP v. DANIEL BREYER, and WILLIAM J. TRELOAR, Intervener

Van Camp v. Breyer, 89 P. 754 (Idaho 1907)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Idaho Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 29, 1907
Judges
Ailshie, Sullivan
Citations
89 P. 75413 Idaho 2091907 Ida. LEXIS 35
Disposition
Order affirmed.
Summary
APPEAL from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District for the County of Custer. Motion for a new trial heard before the Hon. George H. Stewart, Judge of the Third Judicial District. Action to determine the rights and priorities of the respective parties to the waters of Warm Springs creek, Custer county. Judgment and decree determining the respective rights, and plaintiffs moved for a new trial. Motion granted and the defendant appealed. Counsel cite no authorities on points decided not cited in their briefs in Van Gamp v. Emery.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Ailshie

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

AILSHIE, C. J.

This action was commenced in the year 1900, and is a companion case to that of Van Camp et al. v. Emery, ante, p. 202, 89 Pac. 752 , just decided. It involves the appropriation, diversion and use of the waters of Warm Springs creek in Custer county of this state. The case was originally commenced by Yan Camp and Rogers against Breyer, and upon the order of the court that all interested parties be brought in, Treloar filed his complaint in intervention, and the case proceeded to trial and judgment upon the issues made by the plaintiffs, defendant and intervener. The plaintiffs moved for a new trial and the motion was passed upon by Hon. Geo. H. Stewart, judge of the third judicial district, at the same time that he considered the case of Van Camp et al. v. Emery, and a new trial was granted in this case for the same reasons given for granting a new' trial in the other case.

This case should have been properly consolidated with the other case on the trial in the lower court, as both cases involve the appropriation and use of the waters of the same stream, and the same parties are interested with the exception of Breyer, who was the defendant in this case, and was not made a party to the other case.

For the reasons given in the case of Van Camp et al. v. Emery, and upon the authority of that case, the order granting a new trial will be affirmed.

This ease, we think, should properly be consolidated with the other case upon retrial, as one trial will dispose of all the issues made in both cases, and the final decree will determine-the rights and priorities of all the parties in and to the waters of Warm Springs creek.

The order granting a new trial is affirmed, and the case is remanded, with directions to consolidate the two cases and proceed with the trial therein as speedily as the business of the court and the interests of the parties will permit. Costs awarded in favor of the respondents.

Sullivan, J., concurs.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1920: 119202026peak 1920 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Black v. Black191 P. 353 (Idaho 1920)

Most recent

  1. Black v. Black191 P. 353 (Idaho 1920)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Van Camp v. Emery, 89 P. 752 (Idaho 1907) 33

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list