Wright v. Austin
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, C.
The case is here on appeal from a judgment on an agreed statement of facts. Plaintiffs are, and have been for many years, the owners of the premises described in the complaint, situated in Santa Rosa Road District, Sonoma County. Along the northerly side of said lands there is a public highway which -has been in use as such for more than thirty years, and occupies a strip of land twenty-live feet wide, and the center line of the road is the north houndary-line of plaintiff’s land; defendants are the board of supervisors of said county and the ex officio road commissioner of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Jackson ex dem. Yates v. HathawayNew York Supreme Court · 1818
- North Fork Water Co. v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Robert v. . SadlerNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Burris v. People's Ditch Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Gurnsey v. Northern California Power Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- People v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- City of Oakland v. SchenckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Motoramp Garage Co. v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1925
- Las Posas Water Co. v. County of VenturaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.