Legal Opinion

Bales v. City of Tacoma

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1933No. 24340. Department TwoPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSteinert, J.

The plaintiff, the operator of a fish hatchery located about a quarter of a mile south of the city limits of Tacoma, brought this action against the city to recover damages for the loss of fish through alleged contamination of the waters of a stream feeding his hatchery, and to enjoin the continuation of the alleged nuisance causing the contamination. Issues having been joined, the case was tried before the court, sitting without a jury, resulting in a judgment for damages and a decree awarding plaintiff injunctive relief. The city has appealed.

Relieved of the detail disclosed by the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. City of BristolSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
  2. Smith v. City of SedaliaSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
  3. Attorney General ex rel. Township of Wyoming v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Larson v. Union Investment & Loan Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Town of Shelby v. Cleveland Mill & Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Tiegs v. WattsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Tiegs v. WattsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Coney v. Lihue Plantation Co., Ltd.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Goggin v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Ellison v. Rayonier IncorporatedDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1957

7 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