Legal Opinion

Worth v. Witt

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 7, 1923No. Civ. No. 2572PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

Plaintiff brought the action to recover $2,750 which he claimed to be due for rent. Defendants owned an adjoining lot upon which were growing certain trees, the roots of which had intruded into the soil of the lot belonging to plaintiff. The latter gave notice to the former that he would demand a rent of $50 a month for the said use of his land. No attention was paid by respondents to said notice, and thereafter another notice was given that the rent would be $100 a month from a certain date. This was also ignored, and the complaint followed, based upon the theory that by reason of said…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wood, Curtis Co. v. Missouri Etc. Ry. Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Litch v. KernsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
  3. Hanke v. McLaughlinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
  4. Pacific S. Home v. Protection Dist.California Court of Appeal · 1920

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Assured Employment, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Braren v. Reliable Carpet Works, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1932
  3. Ross v. O'BRIENCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  4. Christensen v. Lucerne Holding Co.California Court of Appeal · 1933
  5. Nicoll v. First National Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API