Legal Opinion

East Bay Municipal Utility District v. Kieffer

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 29, 1929No. Docket Nos. 3480, 3481 and 3482Published

1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.

The defendant Kieffer, who will he referred to as the defendant, has appealed from the judgments in three separate proceedings in eminent domain. The three cases were consolidated for trial and tried together.

The plaintiff district includes within its boundaries the principal cities on the easterly shore of San Francisco Bay. For the purpose of providing a water supply for these cities the plaintiff selected a reservoir site, referred to by the parties as the Lancha Plana site, on the Mokelumne River, with the object of impounding the waters of that stream. Northerly and over a ridge from the…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Vallejo & Northern R.R. v. Reed Orchard Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
  2. People v. HickmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  3. San Diego Land & Town Co. v. NealeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. City of Oakland v. Pacific Coast Lumber & Mill Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
  5. City of Los Angeles v. HughesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API