Legal Opinion

Griffin v. Northridge

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 28, 1944No. Civ. 14587PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.

The question for decision is whether the facts established justify the finding of a nuisance on adjacent premises and the consequent award of damages.

In the fall of 1940 plaintiffs purchased a lot on Oporto Drive in a hillside district. The area was restricted exclusively to residential structures with minimum building requirements of $10,000. The lot had dimensions of 109 feet frontage and a depth of 100 feet. At the time plaintiffs acquired their building site defendants had already erected their home on the adjoining lot. In February, 1941, plaintiffs commenced their structure which was…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Green v. General Petroleum Corp.California Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Bellman v. San Francisco High School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Judson v. L.A. Suburban Gas Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Elsbach v. MulliganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. Gibson Properties Co. v. City of OaklandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Mangini v. Aerojet-General Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1991
  2. Wernke v. HalasIndiana Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Schiller v. MitchellAppellate Court of Illinois · 2005
  4. Tooke v. AllenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  5. Hutcherson v. AlexanderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968

14 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