McMenomy v. Baud
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
The plaintiff and defendant are coterminous owners of lots of 27-¡- feet front on Fulton Street, in San Francisco, and running back 120 feet, to Ash *135Avenue. Each, with his family, resided on his lot, there being an open space of only five to six inches between their houses. The defendant operated a small brass-foundry on the first or ground floor of his house, with machinery incidental thereto, propelled by a small steam-engine having a cylinder of six inches diameter and seven inches stroke. The principal machinery consisted of turning-lathes for turning and polishing brass. The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sullivan v. RoyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Tuebner v. Cal. St. R.R.California Supreme Court · 1884
- Carson v. Cent. R.R.California Supreme Court · 1868
- Brown v. KentfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by20 opinions
- Judson v. L.A. Suburban Gas Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
- Anderson v. SouzaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Dauberman v. GrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Vowinckel v. N. Clark & SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- City of Fresno v. Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.