Legal Opinion
Nelson v. Casey
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 9, 1922No. 3698PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtHunt, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
The gravamen of the present action is not founded in contract at all, but in negligence on the part of the defendants in respect to the dam and bulkheads and maintenance thereof. City Water Co. v. Fergus Falls, 113 Minn. 33, 128 N.W. 817, 32 L.R.A.(N.S.) 59, Ann.Cas.1912A, 108. In Free v. Parr Shoals Pwr. Co., 111 S.C. 192, 97 S.E. 243, in an action for damages to land through the negligence of the defendant in the construction of a dam, one of the defenses interposed was that the defendant had been given a right to construct a dam across a certain river,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Savings Bank v. WardSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Thomas v. . WinchesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
- Devlin v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- California Development Co. v. New Liverpool Salt Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1909
- City Water Power Co. v. City of Fergus FallsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Eikland v. CaseyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1923