Fick v. Nilson
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.
This is an action for damages and for injunctive relief. The plaintiff and defendant owned adjoining lands. There was a row of “Athel” trees immediately south of defendant’s south line, growing on a strip over which plaintiff’s predecessor had deeded a right of way for drainage purposes to the Imperial Irrigation District. The drainage ditch ran between this row of trees and the plaintiff’s citrus grove. It appears, without conflict, that the roots and branches of these trees had for many years caused serious damage to defendant’s property. The evidence is conflicting as to whether the value…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wolfsen v. HathawayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Grandona v. LovdalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Stevens v. MoonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Stewart v. SeftonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Butler v. ZeissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Suman v. BMW of North America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1994
- Helm v. BollmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Drewry v. WelchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Cannon v. DunnCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1985
- Bonde v. BishopCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.