Hayashi v. Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, P. J.
Plaintiffs brought this action against the defendant district and others setting forth two causes of action, one alleging negligence, and one purporting to set forth an action in the nature of inverse condemnation. The demurrer to the third amended complaint was sustained without leave to amend, and plaintiffs appeal.
The allegations of the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows: The plaintiffs own certain property in Alameda County upon which they operate their greenhouse and plant growing business. The defendant flood control district owns and operates Alameda Creek as part of its…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Bauer v. County of VenturaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Stone v. Los Angeles County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- The Weinberg Co. v. BixbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Whiteman v. Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Paterno v. StateCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Customer Co. v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Sheffet v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- McMahan's of Santa Monica v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Granone v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.