Richardson v. City of Eureka
California Supreme Court
. Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Humboldt and from an order denying a new trial. G. W. Hunter, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
This action, begun January 6, 1894, is a sequel of the case between the same parties reported in 96 Cal. 443. In that case Richardson obtained a judgment, which was affirmed in this court, for damages accruing to him by reason of a nuisance consisting in the obstruction of a natural watercourse on his land, and caused by certain street improvements made under the direction of defendant. In this action plaintiff seeks to recover for damage caused by the alleged continued maintenance of the same nuisance, and an injunction to restrain the further continuance thereof. We are informed…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Lamb v. HarbaughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Sullivan v. RoyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Lillis v. Emigrant Ditch Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
- Sweetser v. DobbinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Brandt v. WheatonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Farrell v. City of OntarioCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Fisher v. ZumwaltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Union Oil Co. v. Reconstruction Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937
- People v. Conagra Grocery Prods. Co., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. MonsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.