Irwin v. Phillips
California Supreme Court
5 Cal. 140 (1855)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
Matthew Irwin (defendant) owned a canal that diverted water from a stream to a mining operation. Sometime after Irwin’s diversion of the water, Robert Phillips (plaintiff) took up lands along the stream for the purpose of mining. Both Irwin and Phillips were enjoying the right to dig for gold on public lands, so neither had a private property interest in the land on which the stream or mining operations were located. Phillips sued Irwin for Irwin’s diversion of the stream from its natural course. Phillips argued that the common-law riparian doctrine ought to apply and that the water must be allowed to flow in its natural channel. The lower court determined that the prior-appropriation doctrine applied, so Phillips had no right to interfere with the prior use of Irwin. Phillips appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Heydenfeldt, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.