Legal Opinion

Tonini v. Ericcsen

California Supreme Court

Decided April 25, 1933No. Docket No. Sac. 4590PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

This action was brought to restrain the defendant Ericcsen from permitting waters from Russ Creek, which defendant Ericcsen had diverted on to his own lands, to escape to and on to the lands occupied by the plaintiff, and for damages already sustained by the plaintiff by reason of water escaping from defendant’s said lands on to the lands in the possession of the plaintiff. Defendant answered and claimed a right, or easement, to have the waters of Russ Creek flow over and across the said lands, of which the plaintiff was in possession. The question of damages was submitted to a jury and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hoyt v. HartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Gallatin v. Corning Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
  3. McCarthy v. Gaston Ridge Mill & Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Smalley v. George C. Peckham Co.California Supreme Court · 1917

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Taub v. BowlesEmergency Court of Appeals · 1945
  2. McMahan's of Long Beach v. McMahan Service Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API