Guttenberger v. Woods
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Sacramento. The plaintiff was the owner of the west one-fourth of lot No. 3, between K and L and 8th and 9th streets, city of Sacramento, and had a brick building on the same, eighty feet in depth from the street. The wall on the east side of the building and lot extended one story below the surface of the ground and two stories above, and, at the surface and below, extended to the plaintiff’s east line.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Sacramento. The plaintiff was the owner of the west one-fourth of lot No. 3, between K and L and 8th and 9th streets, city of Sacramento, and had a brick building on the same, eighty feet in depth from the street. The wall on the east side of the building and lot extended one story below the surface of the ground and two stories above, and, at the surface and below, extended to the plaintiff’s east line. Above the surface of the ground and on the north end the wall, near its top, inclined over the defendant’s land about four…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The Court finds that the wall in controversy stands upon the east line of the plaintiff’s lot and wholly on his land; but above the surface of the ground several portions of the wall project some inches over the adjoining lot of the defendant. The action is in equity to compel the defendant to desist from the use of the wall, and to remove the joists which have been inserted into it. But it is a familiar maxim in courts of equity that he who seeks equity must do equity; and so long as the plaintiff’s wall projects over the defendant’s land, thereby obstructing its free use and…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Benson v. ShotwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Spring Valley Water Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1908
- Trulock v. ParseSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Bank of Escondido v. ThomasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Stanford v. LyonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1883