Courtwright v. Bear River & Auburn Water & Mining Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fourteenth Judicial District, Placer County. After the answer had been filed, a jury trial was had, and plaintiff obtained a verdict for damages. Defendant then moved the Court, before judgment had been entered, to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction. The Court granted the motion, and plaintiff appealed. ¡ The other facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Rhodes, J.:
The complaint avers that the plaintiff, in 1861, became, and from thence has been, and still is the owner and in the possesr sion of the tract of land described; that he inclosed and cultivated the same and has an orchard and vineyard thereon ; that the defendant with force and arms entered upon the land, and by means of a ditch excavated across the land by the defendant, caused large quantities of muddy water to flow over large *575portions of the land, whereby they were rendered unfit for cultivation, and the trees, vines and crops thereon were destroyed; that the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Conant v. ConantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- American Co. v. BradfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Hill v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Blanc v. KlumpkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Maclay v. LoveCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Mangini v. Aerojet-General Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1991
- Rosenbaum v. BauerSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Memphis Street Railway Co. v. ByrneTennessee Supreme Court · 1907
- State of Florida v. SullivanSupreme Court of Florida · 1928
- Jones v. ReedWashington Supreme Court · 1891
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.