Fairchild v. Oakland & Bay Shore Railway Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County, and from an order denying a new trial. T. W. Harris, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Plaintiffs, as tenants in common of a corner lot in the city of Oakland, brought this action against defendant to recover damages occasioned to their property by the construction and maintenance of an electric street railroad, the tracks of which" were laid close to the curbing along the line of their property. They recovered judgment and defendant appeals from' that judgment and from, the order of the court denying its motion for a new trial.
The first contention is that the proper operation of such an electric street railroad is not an additional burden or servitude upon the street so that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Eachus v. Los Angeles Consolidated Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- Montgomery v. Santa Ana Westminster Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- Smith v. Southern Pacific R.R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
3Cited by12 opinions
- Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Lane v. San Diego Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1929
- McCandless v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- McKinney v. RudermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Marblehead Land Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.