Legal Opinion

McIvor v. Mercer-Fraser Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 25, 1946No. Civ. 7204PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeek, J.

Plaintiffs and defendants are adjoining landowners in the city of Eureka. Appellants’ property up to the time of the commencement of the within action was being used for the excavation of dirt and gravel while plaintiffs’ property was and is improved with a small house where said parties reside, and a garage containing a bedroom and bath.

Shortly after defendants began excavating their property plaintiffs protested to them and also to the City Council of Eureka that the manner in which the work was being done endangered their property. Defendants ignored plaintiffs’ protest as well as the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Green v. General Petroleum Corp.California Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Judson v. L.A. Suburban Gas Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Dauberman v. GrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Cushing - Wetmore Co. v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Barnes v. BerendesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Nestle v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. River Garden Farms, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  3. Spaulding v. CameronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  4. McElwain v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Frankland v. City of Lake OswegoOregon Supreme Court · 1973

28 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