Legal Opinion

Haynes v. Indio Levee District

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 5, 1920No. Civ. No. 3177PublishedCited by 6 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtSloane, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of dismissal of the action as to Charlotte M. Price, one of the defendants. The order of dismissal was made upon plaintiffs’ refusal to amend after demurrer sustained to plaintiffs’ second amended complaint.

The facts set out in the second amended complaint are substantially as follows: That the defendant Indio Levee District, a regularly organized levee district under the laws of the state of California, by its trustees, constructed a dam across the natural channel of White Water River, a natural waterway, and also above this dam cut a new channel through a…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Cahill v. Superior Court of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Cohen v. CohenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Miller & Lux Inc. v. Enter. Canal & Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Chapman v. HughesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Smith v. Anglo-California Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Renninger v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Earl v. LofquistCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
  4. Grosfield v. JohnsonMontana Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Felton Water Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API