Legal Opinion
Costello v. Bowen
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 30, 1947No. Civ. 7351PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
The defendants have appealed from a judgment restraining them from constructing, or maintaining, a dike, dam or other obstruction on their land in Merced County in or across a “natural water course or drainage channel,” designated as “Snake Slough,” in such a manner as to “interfere with the natural flow or elevation of water in said ‘Snake Slough’ or in such manner as to cause water to flow onto, . . . flood or become or remain impounded upon the lands of the plaintiffs.”
The appellants contend that the complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute .a cause of action; that the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Lebrun v. RichardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Los Angeles Cemetery Ass'n v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Sanguinetti v. PockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- The Weinberg Co. v. BixbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Everett v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- United Nuclear Corp. v. General Atomic Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1979
- Alonso v. HillsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Silver v. ShemanskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Tusher v. GabrielsenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- South Santa Clara Valley Water Conservation District v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.