Legal Opinion

Reclamation District v. Hershey

California Supreme Court

Decided September 8, 1911No. Sac. No. 1832PublishedCited by 7 opinions

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Yolo County denying a new trial. E. E. Gaddis, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

This is an action brought by plaintiff to enforce the collection of an assessment upon the lands of the defendants and appellants. Judgment passed for plaintiff. Prom that judgment these defendants did not appeal, their sole appeal being from the order denying their motion for a new trial.

Upon this appeal, however, they urge certain propositions cognizable, if at all, only on appeal from the judgment, and others which in the condition of the record cannot here be considered. Thus appellants filed an amendment to their answer tendering certain new matters as a defense. This amendment was…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Tynan v. WalkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
  2. Swift v. Occidental Mining & Petroleum Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Kimball v. Richardson Kimball Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Reclamation Dist. No. 70 v. BirksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Holmes v. WarrenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Henderson v. NorthamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Meyer v. Reclamation District No. 17California Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Spurrier v. Reclamation District No. 17California Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Hershey v. Reclamation District No. 730California Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Reclamation Dist. No. 730 v. HersheyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915

2 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